ASRock.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Technical Support > Intel Motherboards
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Asrock X99E-ITX/ac 64GB Ram
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search Search  Events   Register Register  Login Login

Asrock X99E-ITX/ac 64GB Ram

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
Author
Message
O_and_N View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 20 Sep 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 26
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote O_and_N Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Oct 2016 at 10:51pm
Thanks.Will be looking forward to see this.By the way,is your cpu a engineering sample or the full retail one?
Back to Top
breathless19 View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 24 Sep 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 11
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote breathless19 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Oct 2016 at 12:36pm
Originally posted by O_and_N O_and_N wrote:

Thanks.Will be looking forward to see this.By the way,is your cpu a engineering sample or the full retail one?

Its an ES
Back to Top
breathless19 View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 24 Sep 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 11
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote breathless19 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Oct 2016 at 11:37am
Update: 

Discovered an instability problem with my GTX 970 Mini, so I RMA'd it and bought a Zotac GTX 1070 Mini. 

Surprisingly, I do not get the idea that there is any CPU bottleneck whatsoever. When I run benchmarks, my CPU usage remains low while my GPU usage goes sky high. If anything, it seems like my GPU is the bottleneck - even with a massive overclock. So, unless I'm missing something, all those people telling you that a low GHZ cpu will cause a bottleneck seems unjustified. Unless I'm missing something... 






UPDATE 2: 

Asrock has apparently updated their specs page again, this time showing 128GB Ram compatibility: 

http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/X99E-ITXac/?cat=Specifications

"- Max. capacity of system memory: 64GB (with Core??i7 CPU) or 128GB (With Xeon® CPU)*"


Edited by breathless19 - 16 Oct 2016 at 12:21pm
Back to Top
parsec View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 04 May 2015
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4996
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote parsec Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Oct 2016 at 12:36pm
Originally posted by breathless19 breathless19 wrote:

Update: 

Discovered an instability problem with my GTX 970 Mini, so I RMA'd it and bought a Zotac GTX 1070 Mini. 

Surprisingly, I do not get the idea that there is any CPU bottleneck whatsoever. When I run benchmarks, my CPU usage remains low while my GPU usage goes sky high. If anything, it seems like my GPU is the bottleneck - even with a massive overclock. So, unless I'm missing something, all those people telling you that a low GHZ cpu will cause a bottleneck seems unjustified. Unless I'm missing something... 





UPDATE 2: 

Asrock has apparently updated their specs page again, this time showing 128GB Ram compatibility: 

http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/X99E-ITXac/?cat=Specifications

"- Max. capacity of system memory: 64GB (with Core??i7 CPU) or 128GB (With Xeon® CPU)*"


I would expect a video card benchmark to focus its testing on the video card itself, with minimal dependence on the system's CPU, so the CPU does not influence the result as much as possible.

Also, a video card benchmark test is unlikely to function the same way as a game does. A game will be loading new data for foreground and background images, monitoring multiple types of user input, etc, while a benchmark uses one set of image data that it uses to find the maximum FPS, and only monitors for user input to end the test.

I still agree that modern CPUs are not a bottleneck of any kind for video cards. Video cards have become so sophisticated, that the amount of support required from the CPU has become less significant than in the past. For example, how much system memory is being used when a video card has 4GB+ of its own memory?

If gamers were honest with themselves, if their CPU is a bottleneck for their gaming performance, their video card became a bottleneck first, with the CPU supposedly taking up where the video card left off. Otherwise, a video card is waiting for the CPU to provide it with something it must have to continue. That something may be unrelated to the CPU (disk IO), it is just the middle man.

 IMO, the excuse of blaming the CPU for poor video performance, has become a "fact" that gamers worry about, that is really not a problem for anyone with a modern, four core processor. Or is it reasonable to blame my video card for a low CPU benchmark score?
Back to Top
Xaltar View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 16 May 2015
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 22793
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Xaltar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Oct 2016 at 2:25pm
Quote IMO, the excuse of blaming the CPU for poor video performance, has become a "fact" that gamers worry about, that is really not a problem for anyone with a modern, four core processor. Or is it reasonable to blame my video card for a low CPU benchmark score?

In many cases this holds true. In most instances where a CPU is found to be bottlenecking a GPU it is a dual core, old quad core (FX 4k/Phenom/Core2Quad) or an ultra low power CPU (AM1, SoC, intel U). There are some cases where games require a lot of CPU grunt for things like AI, physics and predictive algorithms, almost all these cases are MMOs (typically FPS). In rare cases a CPU overclock or more powerful CPU will have an impact on gameplay, mostly reducing stuttering but also improving FPS when all cores were at or near 100% load on the slower solution. All these situations however are due to the way these games are optimized, NOT insufficient CPU grunt. In games like these the focus is target audience, allowing as many people to play as possible on the broadest possible hardware spectrum. This means many of these games do not fully utilize the capabilities of a modern GPU, if the guy on an iGPU can't use the feature it is handed off to the CPU for compatibility. I wouldn't call it poor or lazy optimization, it is quite deliberate and in every situation where the CPU is proving to be a bottleneck it can be negated by lowering certain visual settings. Basically the game should play smoothly at it's lowest settings on it's minimum requirement hardware, which tends to be rather low spec. The problem is that while it all works great at low settings the higher tier settings increase the load on the CPU beyond what another non MMO title would require and then we start seeing bottlenecks in large battles with 10 - 50 players etc.

GPU benchmarks are designed to stress the GPU and push it to it's limits. Everything is scripted so the CPU does not have a whole lot to do. A benchmark does not have the necessity for user input, interaction or random movement, these are the elements that use the CPU most in games.
Back to Top
Intange View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 02 Apr 2018
Location: Newmarket
Status: Offline
Points: 1
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Intange Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2018 at 4:35am
Did you get 64gb gb to work, I have the crucial 32gb sticks and it will not recognize it. I have an intel xeon 2650V3 12 core processor.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.04
Copyright ©2001-2021 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.129 seconds.