MSI MAG X570 Tomahawk Review

ket

ket

Associate
Joined
7 Aug 2018
Posts
49
TuHbSoc.png
MAG X570 Tomahawk Review

Introduction

It’s been a while since I’ve written a motherboard review so I thought it was about time for another peoples review taking a look at an X570 chipset mainboard. We will be looking at the X570 Tomahawk WIFI from MSI this time, there has been some really weird stuff going on at MSI in more recent times with a prominent individual committing suicide, shady practices whereby MSI try to strong arm reviewers into giving them favourable review scores and moderators in their forums threatening users who have a difference in opinion and politely explain why they are wrong about something and even give independent sources not just opinion to substantiate their claim(s). For these reasons I too will be distancing myself from MSI for the time being (but I will be keeping a close eye on you, MSI) after this review but let us push forward and try to focus on just the hardware, will the X570 Tomahawk “return to honour” as MSI like to say, or be dishonourably discharged? Let’s find out, and rest assured MSI are under an extra powerful microscope from me today with their recent behaviour and shenanigans I won’t be allowing them to get away with anything, not even the tiniest discretion.


Gallery

D1gdO9v.jpg

uWSHqGS.jpg

In terms of packaging the X570 Tomahawk is packaged quite well the box doesn’t have that same feeling of quality the X470 Gaming Pro Carbon had though despite the Tomahawk being about £30 more expensive. The accessories on the other hand are, well, as good as non-existent excluding the standard paraphernalia included with every mainboard such as driver DVD and user manual literally the only things you are getting are 2x SATA cables and the mandatory WIFI antenna, and that’s it. I recall the same thing happening with the SATA cables with the X470 Gaming Pro Carbon as well but you weren’t spending £200 on that board the lack of SATA cables here is penny pinching to the extreme by MSI.

If budget was a concern MSI could have made the instruction manual localised to the region they are selling, or better yet, make the manual digital only like almost every instruction manual is now to get the budget for the extra couple SATA cables in that way. I hate seeing needless waste and the user manual has 39 pages of use to English speaking countries, the ensuing 120 pages are naturally of no use at all so why not localise the manual MSI and be more environmentally friendly.

6e8VOBl.jpg

Taking a look at the IO layout it is populated with 2x USB 2.0 ports, WIFI connections, a PS2 port, HDMI, flash CMOS button, 2x USB 3.2 5Gbps, 3x USB 3.2 10Gbps Type A and C ports, 2.5G LAN port and obligatory audio jacks with SPDIF.

I’m not a fan of the PS2 port, in my book that is obsolete tech and the space it takes would be much better utilised as USB ports and I’m not sold on the inclusion of WIFI. MSI have at least taken one thing on board, heh, yes, pun intended, by including a firmware flashback feature that you can also use to update the UEFI on the board even without primary components installed, this gives users the ability to easily recover from a bad flash themselves without having to rip the system apart to RMA for what is a very simple fix.

HMTQPus.jpg

Taking a closer look at the Tomahawk itself nothing stands out as being a particular weakness but I am going to point out the awful placement of the fan headers, you have one 4 pin header either side of the DIMM banks and the rest are lazily shuffled along the bottom of the board in a “just let the user deal with it” manner. We collectively established many years ago MSI that a fan header mid board for rear intake or exhaust fans is important, as is having one in the general area of the SATA ports for a side or front fan. On the plus side, with a total of 6 fan headers at least you still have more than the meagre 4 Gigabyte give you with the similarly priced Aorus Elite.

I am absolutely elated by the fact the Tomahawk is not loaded with LEDs but the placement of the few LEDs the board does have I don’t like, MSI for reasons that I’m quite sure absolutely nobody can fathom still insist on placing the LEDs on the rear of the board at the edge near the DIMM banks, this position someone clearly has a real turn on for heh... lights, turn on and off, yes, another intended pun. The most logical place to put LEDs if you are going to use them is somewhere you can’t easily illuminate yourself if you want to, like as part of the shroud over the rear IO like on the X470 GPC (you’re going to see this board referenced a lot). Finally coming to the M.2 slots I am pleased to see both of them have a heatsink, you either include heatsinks for every M.2 slot you have on the board or don’t include any there is no halfway house here because people like to match things like that up.


Laid To Bare

OnifKwX.jpg

Alright, now for the good stuff tearing the board down reveals exactly what hides under all those shrouds and heatsinks. We get a good view of the layout as well and that is where we will start. The first thing that is immediately obvious is what has been covered in brief already, the sheer stupidity of the CPU AIO Pump header placement, who’s going to use that being all the way out there? Nobody is going to have a cable trailing half way across the board and memory to use that header. The only time it might become feasible to use is if you have an extension cable allowing you to route most of the AIO pump wire behind the board but that comes with drawbacks of its own like having to negotiate your way around the VRM heatsinks, you’re going to be better off using this header for a front fan or RAM cooler the lone CPU fan header will deal with the requirements of an AIO pump just fine as all of the fan headers are rated for 1 amp. Considering the number of people that still use traditional air coolers an extra fan header for people that have dual CPU fan configurations wouldn’t have gone amiss either, now those people are going to have to use a splitter cable which certainly won’t look particularly nice when going for a clean looking build.

A look at the integrated components doesn’t reveal much it is better than average with the 2.5Gbit RTL8125B, intel AX200 WIFI and Realtek ALC1200 but I’m willing to bet the LAN makes no difference to the majority of people over the more standard Realtek L8200A (1Gbit) LAN. The cost of that WIFI module is really starting to have detrimental impacts at this point I feel not including it definitely would have allowed for higher quality components overall and extra USB ports.
Speaking of components capacitors on the board are standard looking through hole polymer, I’ll guess they have a lifetime guarantee of 5000hrs, but could be anywhere between 1000hrs and 5000hrs. I’d hope they are the upper end of that scale as pricing is negligible for much better caps, for example when looking on farnell.co.uk a 105c rated 6.3v Panasonic 560μF polymer through hole 5000hr capacitor is 25.9 pence per piece while a 6.3v 105c rated KEMET 560μF polymer through hole capacitor specified for a mere 2000hrs is 24.7 pence per piece. 1.2 pence for a much more durable capacitor is nothing at all so there’s no reason not to use higher life guarantee capacitors for extra durability.
PCI-E slot layout has been thought about at least with an M.2 slot being placed above the first PCI-E slot so an M.2 drive won’t cook itself when a GPU is under load and allows for much more convenient M.2 upgrades and cleaning not having to pull the GPU out. Spacing is also good between slots and as optimal as you get on an ATX board. I’ll draw attention now to the “Armor” MSI are again including on the PCI-E slots and once again pose a simple question; have you, or anyone you know, ever broken a PCI-E slot just inserting or taking an add-in board out? No? I didn’t think so. All of the “reinforced armour” as far as I am concerned is yet more clap-trap rubbish primarily for marketing that adds manufacturing cost to the construction of a board without giving any useful benefit. What makes this worse is that MSI have half arsed their “armor” (no typos here, I’m British so for me armour has a “u” in there) by doing it for the top 16x PCI-E slot and just “brackets” for the lower slot, choose which way you want to do it MSI and stick to it, or don’t do it at all. You do get 2x USB 3 headers which is useful but the second one does feel like more of a cheap solution to the lack of USB ports on the rear IO but at least this does allow someone to add a drive bay USB expansion which is better than nothing.

Taking a look at the VRM and DIMM banks topology the Tomahawk appears to be a Daisy Chain, the VRMs are the one real highlight in this tear down consisting of Intersil ISL99360 BFRZ rated for 60A, the controller is the Intersil ISL69247 IRZ which is 8 phase configured for 6+2 and also used are the Intersil ISL6617 phase doublers. On the other end of the scale we have the On-Semi 4C024 rated for 78A and 4C029 rated for 46A. These are all good components there’s nothing to really turn your nose up at here. For comparison the X470 GPC I reviewed used the IR35201 configured for 5+2, On-Semi 4C024 and 4C029 as well as the IR3598 phase doublers so there is actually very little difference between the two boards here.


Test Setup

CPU: AMD Zen 2700X @ 4.1GHz 1.3v
Mainboard: MSI X570 Tomahawk
RAM: 2x16GB Klevv BoltX 3600MHz @ 3466MHz 18-19-18-18-35 2T
GPU: Powercolor 6800XT Red Devil
Storage: 250GB Hynix SL301 SATA SSD, Asgard 250GB NVMe (OS drive) & 500GB, 2TB Seagate Barracuda
Opticals: 24x Lite-On iHAS324 DVD-RW, 16x HP BH40N Blu-Ray
Sound: Xonar DX 7.1, Realtek ALC1200
PSU: EVGA 1000w Supernova G2
OS: Windows 10 Pro x64 (latest ISO) and all updates
Case: NZXT Phantom 530


Test Your Metal

As ever for thermal load testing I will be using a DT8380 infrared temperature gun, accurate to +/- 2% and to ensure tests have a good degree of consistency where possible across reviews stock thermal pads are replaced with Akasa 6w/mk pads. We want to test heatsink solutions and their efficiency here, not which manufacturer has the better stock thermal pads.

For those that don’t know the most efficient type of heatsink is always one that uses high grade thermal interface material, the thinner the better, good contact between heatsink and IC (a good, solid imprint of the heatsinked ICs is a sure indication of optimal contact), solid way of mounting the heatsinks, and the heatsinks themselves will have a lot of fins to maximise cooling capacity to take advantage of any natural airflow with the base of the heatsink being free of any milling marks that would hinder thermal efficiency.

LNkqm8J.jpg

Taking a look at the heatsinks and their mounting we can see that the X570 Tomahawk heatsinks are well made with a decent amount of surface area the mounting for them is also extremely good no board warping and the heatsinks have a lot of heft about them with a less traditional but good number of fins all standing them in good stead for being excellent heatsinks. The surface area is also well finished with no machine milling marks ensuring good heat transfer. The main VRM heatsink also doesn’t just have that plate screwed to it I thought I was going to get MSI here in a “gotcha” moment but nope, that plate seems to be soldered or at least stuck down with thermal glue.

Scrutinising the chipset heatsink there’s no weak thermal epoxy used we get a thin thermal pad so replacing it with TIM if you prefer is nice and easy and something I would recommend given the temperature the X570 chipset can get you want that thermal transfer as good as it can be. Mounting pressure as you can see from the imprints in the thermal pads is also very good and the pads aren’t too thick so thermally there isn’t much of an issue here but I will turn your attention to the surface area, all that area yet MSI didn’t use a silent finned design sticking a tiny noisy fan in there even though the heatsink is crying out to be a silent finned solution with all that surface area, absolutely incredulous.

Now let’s take a look at those VRM temperature results.

S8el7GF.jpg

The results are in and they are good, very good, dethroning the reigning champion of 3 years, the X370 Titanium, is deserving of applause thermal load balancing is clearly not an issue here either despite there being no heatpipe, I would still like to see one on every board though especially the ones that have very minimal VRM heatsinks. I did also peek at chipset temperatures and with an idle load and default fan speed (none) for me it runs a little warm at 54c, this is quite typical for an X570 chipset but an extremely minimal 15% of the chipset fans maximum RPM will drop that temp to about 43c which is much better. Do the chipset a favour and use some nice thermal paste with a tiny amount of airflow it’ll thank you for it.


The UEFI – Unified Extensible Firmware Interface

The next stop is the firmware all images have been taken from firmware 7C84v15, I’ll admit this review got delayed where I wanted to wait for this firmware release because earlier versions, to be as succinct as possible, were below par, missing features of older AM4 boards, questionable memory compatibility, old bugs rearing up again older chipsets have long since had firmware updates to resolve, etc. And yes, it is UEFI, not “BIOS”, the latter is simply a component of the former now this link will give you some of the simpler reasons why this is now the case.

9rlQnMm.jpg

KwbsLpJ.jpg

Cutting out the chuff we are going to get straight to where people will spend most of their time, the OC menu. With UEFI 1.5 you’ll finally have a complete set of options I won’t praise or judge for it taking until this point to happen as it is hard to know if the fault lays with MSI or AMD in this instance due to the AGESA code but it certainly would have been nice to have more refined firmware for the board earlier than this point. I do like how you literally have every tool for OCing at your disposal including the more obscure ones like CPU switching frequency and Spread Spectrum although the latter you can only enable or disable which is a bit annoying and certainly limits the usefulness of Spread Spectrum when trying to get rid of some EMI but chances are it won’t do much for EMI anyway.

f9vgSXE.jpg
sDvWGqj.jpg

121GkqK.jpg

DRAM options are comprehensive and we do have TRFC2 and 4 which is something the X470 GPC did not initially have, this is something which got addressed after me recommending the addition of these settings things have certainly gone way beyond coincidental at this point with almost everything I have bought up in the past as things to fix getting addressed in firmware updates or newer board releases in succession starting with the X370 Titanium progressing to the X470 GPC, and now the X570 Tomahawk so perhaps you should just reach out MSI.

124E397.jpg

Now to take a look at the available fan control, much like everything else about the firmware it is extremely comprehensive and well laid out the only gripe I have is that there is not a way to manually key in fan values as setting the values you want via the fan graph can be finicky. I found myself spending a good 10-15 minutes configuring all the fan profiles when a simple key-in feature would have allowed me to do the same thing in about 1 minute, top marks for layout and features but not so much for usability and practicality.


Audio Analysis

Continuing on from the introduction of it with the X470 Fatal1ty K4 review the audio analysis returns for what is now a permanent new section in these peoples reviews. With mainboards ever increasing in price and seemingly ever diminishing returns for your investment mainboards deservedly require much more scrutiny than what they are currently given and I intend to give mainboards just such scrutiny.

The objective in this section is to more than just test the audio and present an RMAA graph I like to also put an audio implementation through its paces by testing its capabilities by assaulting it with many sound sources and reverb effects all at the same time to truly test how good it is, measure the performance against a dedicated sound card and above all else to see if I can make the on-board audio make any pops or cracks where it becomes overwhelmed or susceptible to EMI or crosstalk, for this purpose I will use the Metro Last Light Redux benchmark for the excellent variety in audio it offers.
Beginning with the ALC1200 specs grabbing these details to answer the prevalent question on the internet – Just what are the differences between the ALC1200 and ALC1220 were not easy to come by at all as Realtek are extremely secretive about these CODECs being their latest and greatest but I can now peel back this veil of secrecy to a good degree for everyone to answer that question.

w4EY5VX.jpg

So the short answer is that the differences are not substantial for the most part but the weak front audio will certainly put some people off, as will the lack of a DSD (Direct Stream Digital) encoder and decoder making the ALC1200 powerful for the most part on paper, but very basic. Ok, enough with paper specs let’s look at the hardware.

VaIDOx1.jpg

Hiding under that aluminium anti-EMI shell is the ALC1200 which is filtered, as noted by the plain PCB line. The implementation is average without so much as being customised to the point of including an op-amp but at least the filtering caps that would otherwise be used for the op-amp aren’t removed they are moved up next to the ALC1200 this should stop the nasty audio pops and cracks the X470 GPC suffered with. MSI still aren’t using my preferred Nichicon Fine Gold capacitors electing to stick with the Nippon Chemi-Con instead, I say preferred as the Nichicons have always provided a better sound than the Chemi-Cons from my experience with audio projects. We are ultimately looking at a downgrade here though as the X470 GPC uses the better ALC1220.

97U6c3f.jpg
GKvKHwW.jpg

Taking a look at the audio software this is what you will be greeted with if you install the latest UAD (Universal Audio Driver) and then separately have to head to the Windows Store and search “Realtek Audio Console”, once installed do a Windows search for it, open it, right-click the icon on the taskbar and select “Pin to taskbar”, yes, this really is meant to be easier than just downloading and installing the old Realtek HDA driver that installs everything in one swoop. You can still find the HDA drivers but MSI aren’t going to point you to them in fact the download page doesn’t even have a link for the HDA drivers but worry not simply head here for a custom package I put together. Due to all of this inconvenience, and the unreliable nature of Windows and the Windows Store at installing the UAD audio console I have compiled a custom package for the UADs as well you can get here. Be sure to read the readme to correctly install the audio console.

I think you can all probably guess what I’m going to bring up next... the horribly, and needlessly, bloated UI. Just look at all of that wasted space this UI could be much more compact and every bit as easy to use what is it with all these unnecessarily bloated UI’s over the last couple years?

On further investigation neither Nahimic 2.5+ or Nahimic 3 will function on the X570 Tomahawk meaning MSI haven’t paid a license fee to Nahimic for the Tomahawk, if you are a gamer who bought the Tomahawk and expected the Nahimic suit to be included I’d imagine you are feeling pretty miffed right about now getting this confirmation, and with good reason considering the price of the Tomahawk and the already cut down audio implementation. Perhaps in-use testing rather than a pure hardware analysis will reveal something that is not yet apparent.

Now for testing, my RMAA results will differ from most as I test with the system loaded not idle because this is when EMI and crosstalk potential is going to be at the highest levels, and guess what sorts of scenarios this happens in, Yup, gaming, so testing this way will give you a more accurate representation of how the audio will perform in actual usage and why I test the audio with a gaming benchmark in addition to RMAA.

I’ll be testing at 24bit 48KHz, not 192KHz, this is because unless you have audio hardware costing in the thousands you will not be able to hear the extra frequencies 192KHz produces but you will be able to hear intermodulation between inaudible frequencies in some situations and you could potentially see odd frequency response due to resampling this is why 24bit 48KHz is far more realistic and practical to not only use as a standard but test at as well. It also needs to be noted that with RMAA you cannot reliably test the quality of the DAC (Digital to Analogue audio Converter) a mainboard uses but rather the quality of the ADC (Analogue to Digital Converter) on the Line-In with the standard test however both the ADC and DAC are important. What RMAA will do for us with the standard test is provide insight into the D/A and A/D electrical design to give some evidence at least that corners have not been cut however the loopback test is also not infallible as it represents the absolute best case on the Line-Out and not necessarily represent what you would get in practice, for instance if you have very long low quality wires.

If you want to run your own RMAA tests using the same criteria I do you can do so by following these steps;

1. Download and install RMAA 6.4.5
2.Connect Line-Out (Speaker Out) to Line-In on the rear IO with a 3.5mm male to male stereo cable, something with gold plated connections and adequate shielding on the cable is preferable for the most accurate results.
3. Set speaker volume to 100%
4. Start RMAA and change the drop-down fields to 24bit and 48KHz
5. Click the button with a gold speaker
6. Adjust Line-In level in your audio CP until both channels are somewhere in the -2db to -1db range
7. Disable the Equaliser in your audio CP (or set it to “flat”) otherwise results will be affected.
8. Start the test

Right, to the RMAA results the first two charts are for people less experienced with audio to show more clearly what is considered good and bad the Xonar will go first;
ADoZKff.jpg

Anyone who is familiar with the Xonar DX is likely aware of just how good it is, or was, it is about 12 years old now, but if we take RMAAs result at face value it would still have us believe it kicks some rather serious posterior so is our yardstick to measure all other challengers by.

Step up ALC1200...

YFuxdD5.jpg

I am by no means an audiophile nor am I the type of person to go spending thousands on equipment for near imperceptible differences but like everybody I do expect the hardware to do the task it is meant for to an acceptable standard and in this regard the MSI attempt at audio is not even close to acceptable on the Noise test or the THD + Noise and IMD + Noise tests, these are differences that you can hear through speakers or headphones and we will get in to this shortly.

The indication in these results is that MSI have on paper done a rather bad job and is frankly embarrassing for a £200 mainboard next to what is now a 12 year old audio card. You would be right to think the ALC1200 won’t have phenomenal results however the performance here is very sub-standard for a modern on-board audio solution. Let’s have a look at the side by side comparison.

VTfPEEr.jpg

The comparison chart shows us nothing new but does make things easier to look at the loop back results from the Xonar DX absolutely eclipse the rather miserable results of the MSI Tomahawk’s ALC1200. I wouldn’t blame you for thinking there is an error in these results but I can assure you there is not I thought there was an error with the ALC1200 results as well so I ended up spending almost 2 days re-running tests, changing audio equipment, checking and re-checking things, and even getting some new audio equipment to make absolutely sure. The results are accurate.

For the final RMAA test we are going to examine the quality of the ADC and DAC to see exactly where MSI has cut corners by using the Xonar DX output to loop back to the ALC1200 input to measure the ADC, we’ll then switch things around and connect the Xonar input to the ALC1200 output to measure the DAC. This test also has the nice benefit of being able to do a more specialised result of the ALC1200 recording and playback performance as the standard loopback test cannot isolate and independently test the ADC and DAC.

Ixyt7D8.jpg

Here we have it the Analogue to Digital Converter (ADC) is the culprit of the bad results from the standard loopback test it is safe to say the ADC is largely absolute trash with terrible noise levels, THD + Noise, and IMD + Noise results, dynamic range and stereo crosstalk also isn’t particularly good. On the other hand the DAC, while not amazing, is pretty good with only the IMD + Noise result being below expectations. Now, I know for a fact that most soundcard manufacturers use testing equipment from Audio Precision so you would think mainboard manufacturers also use the same software when designing and calibrating their on-board audio however based on these results here MSI aren’t there is no way given the results this would pass anything but a blind test with no comparison, and we’ll be putting that into action now as well so let’s move on to the Metro LL tests for some subjective listening to see if there’s any surprises in wait.

nJWv4Zj.jpg

These subjective listening tests are done using a 5.1 Auna Concept 620 speaker system (LINK[/u]), I have entirely recapped the sub with Rubycon capacitors and power current handling upgraded to twin 50v capacitors instead of twin 25v. The twin RCA to 3.5mm jack is made by Neoteck and is dual shielded, uses oxygen free copper wire and 24K gold plated connections. This gear can be considered pretty standard with mods it takes it to a high enough level to separate the wheat from the chaff.

As it left less than a pleasant impression during the RMAA tests the ALC1200 has the chance to draw first blood in the subjective audio test, with no equaliser sounds are muddy, muffled, and flat sounding like everything was being spewed out across the same channel, the audio just has no life or soul, or depth, definition, and clarity if you prefer.

Enabling the equaliser and using custom settings does at least help restore some clarity, punch and depth but nowhere near enough. The moved filtering does at least appear to prevent any audio pops and cracks with no performance anomalies outside of scene changes. Overall the gaming audio experience I found to be an unpleasant assault to listen to lacking a lot of definition and clarity, subjectively it isn’t the worst I’ve ever heard but it also by far and away stands out as the worst I’ve heard even in blind testing through the X370/470/570 era. Honestly I don’t think it is even close to being good enough to even say the casuals will be satisfied not just in quality but lack of gamer orientated audio software features.

ktsPXsE.jpg
The last test is just a formality at this point and sees the comparison against the Xonar DX, in terms of performance anomalies there are none and in fact the graph paints a picture of a more stable frame rate compared to the ALC1200 with less extreme low points. When talking about audio quality there could not be more of a difference the Xonar simply blows the ALC1200 away in every imaginable metric, depth is better, the audio has clarity, there is a hefty punch. It has life and soul.


Software

This is where we would usually take a look at the MSI Command Centre and I would heap praise on it for the versatility it has but MSI have replaced the Command Centre with “Dragon Centre”, the latter is total poison being a regression in every way compared to Command Centre I wouldn’t waste your time, or mine, with it in this review but even the stand alone Mystic Light has been axed and melded with this monstrosity so to look at the LED functionality of the Tomahawk we are all going to have to suffer through this.

jDTtzNf.jpg

I’m going to pull everyone to this right away, after DC (eventually) finishes installing you’ll have to do a Windows search for “Dragon Centre”, yes, you don’t even get an icon placed on the desktop for convenience, secondly do not sign in when given the opportunity to do so (just click the “X”) then in the bottom left corner click the cog icon and disable the collection of data. MSI have no reason whatsoever to do this with a utility meant for system monitoring, overclocking and usage of all the available features. If you take a read through the T&Cs that appear the first time you launch DC it sounds like MSI would kidnap your mum and sell her back to you if there was a single pound they could make from it, I’m not even joking here, disgusting the level of privacy invasion and data collection (including attempts at suppressing opinion) MSI are willing to go to if you let them. If you have to use this software I’d even add it to the blocked list in the Windows firewall.

JY4CtfC.jpg

This is the only place really worth visiting in Dragon Centre, everything else worth doing or you need to do you can do faster and easier with a combination of HWinfo64, CPU-Z, and Ryzen Master. If it wasn’t for the fact there isn’t any good third party RGB software (yet) there wouldn’t be any need for DC at all even the LAN manager is nothing more than a customised version of cFosSpeed. DC does at least offer plentiful LED effects to choose from but not as many as you would think let you change the colour, if you regularly like to change LED effects but don’t like the sound of DC you will probably want to keep an eye on JackNet .


Storage Performance & Benchmarks

At last here it is, buried in the depths of this review we finally get to the benchmarks, let’s see how the Tomahawk stacks up.

9pMo0lC.jpg

For the opening volley of benchmarks we start with AS SSD performance, results are right around where they should be here for all drives, even the Seagate Barracuda which I benched purely as a legacy comparison, and boy, I wish I didn’t it took about a million years to complete so.. hmm... I should probably check in on the state of quantum computing after all that time. Buy an SSD people, or whatever the equivalent now is in this far flung future.

f9TxdtS.jpg

Next we have the AIDA64 results, nothing out of the ordinary here to talk about so let’s move straight on to the gaming benchmarks.

Unless otherwise stated all results have been obtained with the highest possible in-game graphical settings. Gaming performance a mainboard in and of itself has very little impact on so we won’t be running a huge amount of tests here but enough to ensure everything is in order.

6VIRMHR.jpg

Unsurprisingly there is nothing unusual or out of place here, I will make a note that the newer AMD drivers look to have fixed Gears 5 performance at 1080p where it has jumped about 10FPS. Tomb Raider results are also interesting as the system managed 121FPS average for both 1080p and 1440p.


Overclocking

Now for the final part of this peoples review it is time to see how the X570 Tomahawk OCs and to see if there are any firmware bugs to report on.

As I stated earlier this review got delayed waiting on UEFI 1.5 as there certainly are, or were, some quirks and issues to contend with in UEFI 1.4 and the beta 1.53. Those issues included DRAM voltage just deciding to be 1.372v after setting CPU and SoC LLC to level 3, a 0.1v negative offset for the CPU resulting in the system failing to POST, the system failing to POST if you enabled Above 4G memory support and BAR at the same time, and memory TCWL values of 18 and 20 not sticking, instead being pegged at 16.

The worst issue though was with memory I used several different kits on the board all using different ICs including Samsung B-Die, Micron E-Die, Hynix DJR, and Hynix MFR. The B-Die kit seemed ok but all of the Hynix and Micron kits had varying degrees of success the Micron kit particularly did not want to work on the Tomahawk one set of DIMM banks the board outright refused to POST and the other set of DIMM banks the most I could coax out of the kit was 2933MHz and that was the kit of Crucial Ballistix I reviewed so know full well the kit is capable of at least 3333MHz. The kit I ended up using for this review is the Klevv BoltX[/u] which as it turns out is on the Tomahawks QVL list for 3000 and 5000 series CPUs while very similar kits from Klevv are on the memory QVL for the 2000 series CPUs. Even with this kit however the Tomahawk still would not POST at some frequencies without the XMP profile being enabled which is quite unusual, the board really doesn’t have a clue on how to set memory timings when left to its own devices. Don’t be fooled by the memory QVL list for the 2000 series CPUs for the Tomahawk at a glance it looks impressive but on slightly closer inspection you will notice the vast, vast, VAST majority are Samsung B-Die kits, not Hynix or Micron. Other manufacturers like Asus and Gigabyte are doing far better on their QVLs for 2000 series CPUs when it comes to actual tested IC variety which is far more important than number of tested brands all using the same ICs.

Things like this is why I test with a slightly older CPU to see if the level of standards you would expect extend to the slightly older hardware as well because most people do incremental upgrades when the time is right, not all at once so it is very common to see a slightly older CPU on a up to date mainboard either because upgrades are being done incrementally or because a certain CPU was significantly cheaper than the newer ones while still offering a large portion of the performance the newer CPUs offer.

With the encountered bugs detailed then with UEFI 1.4 and beta 1.53 just how many are addressed with UEFI 1.5? This is the good news, the TCWL issue is fixed, and the CPU offset voltage and BAR issues have a plaster on them, the former the offset voltage just won’t take effect until you change the CPU multiplier and the latter 4G support toggles enabled or disabled when you enable or disable BAR.

The DRAM voltage issue is still present annoyingly, due to the delays I didn’t have time to re-test the other memory kits to see if the Tomahawks memory compatibility is any better. Three out of five issues fixed or patched is pretty good so hopefully another UEFI revision or two will sort these things out fully.

Right, so time to have a look at the OC results and find out the Tomahawks standing.

cbJmh99.jpg

If I had to choose one word for the AIDA result “strong” would come to mind, Hynix DJR really is underrated those 18-20-18-35 timings are substantially tighter than the stock 18-22-22-42 and there’s plenty of wiggle room outside of the primary timings as well all with a mere 1.37v. Yes, I could throw more voltage at it but these timings at this voltage are already quite good for DJR and there’s only so much slack you can pick up that has notable gains for Zen ordinarily there is just no need to push a memory kit that hard and that is the usage scenario I think is what most people will go with so I do the same to keep things as representative as possible.

XEilbnu.jpg

How I OC has changed a bit since the R7 1700 days I mainly now look to optimise CPU frequency with required voltage, in this area the X570 Tomahawk performed well getting up to 4200MHz with 1.35v, the X470 Carbon couldn’t manage this with even up to 1.4v which is curious given that the board has a VRM that is still pretty strong so without more time it’s difficult to say what the issue here was. Memory results are as good as you can expect from a 2700X really so unsurprisingly all is square here between the Tomahawk and Carbon.

Let’s see how these OC results impact gaming performance.

XBTnqxW.jpg

For a game that leans on the GPU heavily these results are pretty good giving the 1080p and 1440p results a small but healthy bump, at 4K we are completely GPU limited so it should come as no surprise that things remain unchanged here.


Conclusion

Here we are at the end of the road, and one that not only had some unexpected turns but a road that was longer than I would have liked it to be. Mainboard manufacturers really don’t like making their hardware easy to review do they? We’ll be doing much the same as I did for the Powercolor 6800XT review and getting the miscellaneous things out of the way with first before breaking into the scoring to keep things as easy to follow as possible.

With the VRM setup the Tomahawk has it will comfortably cope with the likes of an R9 5950X which a good number of other boards at the price point the Tomahawk is at certainly can’t claim to do as easily. I do think it’s about time manufacturers were only allowed to advertise CPU support based on the VRM capabilities though otherwise we will see the day when manufacturers have a CPU on the supported list for a mainboard but said board can only run that CPU at 2GHz rather than, say, for sake of argument, a default 3.7GHz. We’ve already seen very similar happen with the MSI X570-A Pro and the supposedly much higher end X570 Gaming Edge, and you can include the X570 Gaming Pro Carbon WIFI, Gigabyte Gaming X, and Asrock X570 Steel Legend in that list none of those boards in my book have a VRM good enough and/or adequately cooled by the VRM heatsinks to support a CPU like the 5950X yet all of those boards are happy to list the 5950X as “supported”. It would certainly be interesting to find out how much those boards throttle a 5950X due to inadequate and/or overheating VRMs.

I do like that the Tomahawk doesn’t light up like Mardi-Grass if you want LED lighting that’s what LED fans, strips, cathode lights, etc are for and you can replace those when they start to dim or become faulty no such ability with mainboards incorporating lighting. I don’t like that despite all of the effects you can choose from that you can’t customise the colour on all of them which quite severely affects the entire point of having LEDs on the board to begin with.

I’m also hard pressed to find any reason to justify the 2.5Gbit LAN and the on-board WIFI, the 2.5G LAN you’d need an internet connection of being able to take advantage of it and considering the majority of ISPs cap at 1Gbit it becomes a flip of the coin as to if that 2.5G LAN is really welcome and the included WIFI isn’t anything special either I tested it with a cheap USB adapter that uses a Realtek chip and it didn’t perform any better making the only point in the WIFI being the Bluetooth and when you can easily go out and get a USB Bluetooth adapter it renders the included WIFI also worthless especially as the space and costs saved could have easily gone to adding USB ports on the rear IO which are just infinitely more useful. I really don’t like that PS2 port either with so few USB ports, get rid of it and add more USB ports.

So the question becomes do you really want that 2.5G LAN and WIFI all things considered? I’m going to bet that at this level the large majority of you are going to answer “no” to that meaning MSI could have gone with something like the Realtek L8200A which is a perfectly acceptable option and ditched the WIFI entirely to allow for improvements in much more important areas, like with the audio.

Ok, time for some scoring.

Hardware Functionality & Quality: 14 / 20

Overall the quality of the Tomahawk is high with great heatsinks, a strong VRM, ample albeit poorly placed fan headers, heatsinks for both M.2 slots, flashback port, and well laid out PCI-E slots but the board loses points for not specifying maximum temperature and lifetime for the capacitors, BOTH of the brass nuts for the WIFI came loose during testing leaving the antenna just flopping about which I then had to mess about unscrewing the IO then tightening the nuts properly with pliers. While the hardware for the audio isn’t terrible on the surface you don’t have to scratch it too deeply to uncover it for what it really is which for a £200 board is an embarrassing example of what the ALC1200 is really capable of and the atrocious results of the audio ADC particularly really drag the score down the audio can, and is, done better on other cheaper boards. I expected better here and so should you. If ever you wanted to hear what chronically depressed audio sounds like look no further than the X570 Tomahawks example.

Accessories: 3 / 10

I never thought there would be a day when I would have to rate the accessories bundle below the automatic 5, but here we are, exclude what isn’t absolutely necessary, the WIFI antenna, driver DVD and manual and what are you left with? Two SATA cables, bloody two! Hands up who has more than two devices in their system that require the use of a SATA cable, I bet that’s 80% or more of you and exactly why MSI earns the dishonour of being the first to score below the automatically awarded 5 points for an “average” accessories bundle. You need to at least include enough SATA cables MSI to amount to half of the SATA ports on the board, that’s the rule for the accessories to be considered “average”. It is the lowest of bars, and you failed.

Aesthetics: 7 / 10

I don’t think many people will have too much to complain about with the Tomahawk in terms of looks it’s quite an attractive board that will look good in any build, if it wasn’t for the placement of the LEDs the board does have instead integrating them as part of the rear IO shroud it would have scored higher that is one area that isn’t easily customised with lighting so the board would have been well served by having some there, we just don’t need LEDs near the DIMM slots anymore MSI because we have these doodads you might have heard of that have been around a while now called LED RAM coolers and these fancy things called LED memory modules.

Software 4 / 10

This area used to be a slam dunk for MSI, more than that I considered them the best at it... until Dragon Centre, this piece of software is not only a real personal data leak risk if you let it but the lengths MSI are willing to go to in order to get information on you in addition to clear attempts at stifling opinion if you read the T&Cs is egregious to say the least. Worse still is that you are likely going to have to install this data leak software at least once to set an LED colour or effect that matches with the rest of your system. Dragon Centre is worse in every conceivable way to Command Centre.

Compounding the software woes is the lack of the Nahimic suit leaving the audio as nothing more than a barebones example I’d expect to see on a board £50-60 less and even then it would be designed better, nowhere in the title does the Tomahawk have “gaming” so the absence of the suit I can understand but you get absolutely nothing in place of it, not even a semi-custom ALC1200 better geared for headphones.

UEFI Functionality & Quality: 23 / 30

The firmware has slipped with the Tomahawk it’s quite good but pretty much unchanged from 3 years ago and the X370 boards, the UEFI is still on the buggy side even as of UEFI 1.5, MSI seem to be on the slow side with updates as well to fix these issues and memory compatibility with slightly older CPUs is not of the same standard as what Asus and Gigabyte offer, you want to test as many different ICs as you can, testing as many different memory brands as you can does not equate to testing as many IC types as you can. Asus and Gigabyte have fewer memory kits on their 2000 series QVL lists for X570 but they have tested a wider variety of memory ICs which will always lead to better compatibility. MSI could probably just transplant all the 2000 series CPU memory support from something like the X470 Gaming Pro Carbon and be done with these issues. I really don’t understand why MSI keep forcing the graph on users to set fan profiles either and not allowing direct key-in method as an option which is just much faster and easier.

Performance & Overclocking: 15 / 20

Thankfully the board is a good overclocker which will definitely be a deciding factor for a lot of people and if you are looking for a board with a robust VRM with the intent of perhaps putting a 12 or 16 core CPU in the board you have that as a more viable option than you do with either the Asus X570 TUF or the Asrock X570 Extreme 4 which both have a VRM that is only a 4+2 vs. the Tomahawks 6+2 and on top of this advantage the VRMs also stay the coolest compared to VRMs I’ve measured over the last 3 years which is nothing short of superb. However the memory compatibility issues on slightly older Ryzen CPUs cannot be ignored when other manufacturers are ensuring their boards work with as wide of a range of memory ICs as possible regardless of CPU generation. MSI are simply not doing this with the Ryzen 2000 memory QVL list dominated by Samsung B-Die kits with nary a mention of Micron or Hynix.

Final Score: 66%

In closing don’t pay much attention to the hype around the Tomahawk a good piece of hardware is something that amounts to more than just the sum of its parts not just doing one thing slightly better than most, in this case the VRM. The Tomahawk is alright but it isn’t anything special the WIFI and 2.5G LAN I think forced the MSI engineers to cut corners to meet the desired price point which directly impacted far more important areas like the audio’s poor Analogue to Digital Converter, and lack of USB ports on the rear IO. Memory compatibility with slightly older Ryzen 2000 series CPUs also isn’t as good as the competition and Dragon Centre is a data leak risk.

If you want a good all-round affordable well made board buy the Asus X570 TUF (non WIFI) and save yourself anywhere between £30-50 depending where you shop. If you want a better VRM than what the TUF offers and comes fairly close to the Tomahawk in this area while offering a lot more USB ports buy the Gigabyte X570 Aorus Elite (non WIFI) and save yourself about £15-35. If you want everything the Tomahawk offers and more for the same price buy the Gigabyte X570 Aorus Pro. With all of the aforementioned boards also coming in WIFI flavour it puts the Tomahawk in a weird place of having no particularly notable positive trait and therefore never a serious contender to the Asus TUF or Gigabyte boards. In military vernacular MSI, despite the Tomahawks good training grades the displayed attitude is awful you are hereby dishonourably discharged now go and think about what you are doing, you know all the things I’m talking about here.

EDIT: On further testing the Performance and Overclocking score was too generous. Adjusted accordingly and award REVOKED.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
1 Jul 2011
Posts
1,728
Excellently laid out review but I prefer to watch a video rather than having to wade through all the text, I'm sure it would be easier for the reviewer as well
 

ket

ket

Associate
OP
Joined
7 Aug 2018
Posts
49
Video review of sorts will follow when I get time phil ;) I have a lot of reviews I need to get the video reviews done for but as this isn't a full time thing for me I don't have as much time as I'd like. I do written reviews as well because I can include a lot more detail more old skool enthusiasts would be interested in that would otherwise drag the video reviews out and most people wouldn't be interested in knowing.
 
Associate
Joined
3 Mar 2015
Posts
385
Location
Wokingham
I also found the Crucial Ballistix (Micron E die) didn't work well. But FW 1.2.0.0 seems to have fixed it.

I quite like the wifi, but just because I use it to extend coverage outside the front of my house, as an extender. Ok I admit that it's just a 'toy' :)

The M2's... I never had M2 before this board. I admit that I was expecting fins on those heatsinks... wouldn't that be better than 'flat'?

Audio... well now I'm just going to have to start to research a good soundcard to buy! I didn't know it sounded relatively bad. Now I know it I cannot live with it :) I'm using the rear ports for sound (headphones) but I expect that makes no difference.
 

ket

ket

Associate
OP
Joined
7 Aug 2018
Posts
49
I'm in the process of reviewing a Gigabyte board at the moment and lazy firmware issues aside I'd say looking at the board overall its better than the Tomahawk. Exactly how much better is yet to be determined, but it is better overall and the audio quality on the GB board is superb. If you want a good sound card source yourself an Xonar DX and use the unixonar drivers for it ;)
 

ket

ket

Associate
OP
Joined
7 Aug 2018
Posts
49
The board has the VRM capability so as long as MSI release a firmware update to support the 5900X then yes.
 

ket

ket

Associate
OP
Joined
7 Aug 2018
Posts
49
The Tomahawk is an odd duck, MSI would have gained easily another 14% or so if they still had Command Centre and were equalling players like Asus for memory compatibility on Ryzen 2000 series CPUs. The biggest problems I have with the board are the rather awful audio, memory performance that doesn't quite stack up to the competition (some 2GB/s behind in reads, writes, and copy performance according to AIDA64) and of course how MSI attempt to stifle opinion. They might have changed their Dragon Centre T&Cs after this review, but I certainly will not forget, and witnessing a moderator in the MSI forums threatening a user because the user was right (and provided links to substatiate their claims) really makes you question whats going on over there.

You made the right call with your X570 TUF, VRMs aren't the best but the board is otherwise well balanced and some minor cooling upgrades would ensure the board would be quite capable of handling a 12 core CPU, I wouldn't push the VRMs as hard as running a 16 core CPU personally but it would still be possible as long as you can keep the VRMs at a maximum of about 85c which shouldn't be too hard with better thermal pads for them and getting a bit of airflow over them.
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Nov 2020
Posts
2,506
Had I not already purchased the X570 Tomahawk board, this review would likely have put me off. After 6 months of hassle-free computing I'm pretty happy though. I'm not sure if the USB-C port works correctly so I need to look at that.

One interesting point is regarding Dragon Center. I will be uninstalling that ASAP.

Thanks for the review.
 

ket

ket

Associate
OP
Joined
7 Aug 2018
Posts
49
The shortest way I could describe the Tomahawk is that if you don't care about anything but a souped up VRM for something like a 5950X then there are better rounded boards for less money you could buy, the X570 TUF is quite a favourite of mine especially with the non WIFI version being as low as £160 from some places and the WIFI version about £170. The better audio implementation and accompanying audio software, better memory compatibility and performance, as well as far better system software utilities and better UEFI outweighs the solitary strength the Tomahawk has of the VRMs IMO.

MSI could have done better with the Tomahawk without increasing production costs, likely reducing them in fact, with only minor changes. I didn't really detail it too much but I would have made a second non WIFI SKU Tomahawk that had the following;

More USB ports (in place of the WIFI and PS/2 port)
1Gbit Realtek Ethernet (if theres one thing about Realtek thats stand out good its that driver support for their hardware lasts practically forever)
Reduced the amount of metal the VRM heatsinks use (yes thats possible here its actually overkill)
Semi-custom ALC1200 with headphone op-amp and Nahimic suit

That list excludes more nit-picking things like moving the LED lighting, tweaking the component choice for the VRM (just as good but should be cheaper) and making the chipset heatsink passive but you get the idea how the board could have been a more interesting proposition.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
25 Nov 2020
Posts
2,506
Sound-wise the only problem I have is the speakers clicking when there's no sound on Zoom or low sound in other applications. I don't know whether that's the speakers, the motherboard or software.

Is there any sound software that would improve things for the X570 Tomahawk?
 

ket

ket

Associate
OP
Joined
7 Aug 2018
Posts
49
Crackling over speakers is caused by a combination of EMI\Crosstalk\poor quality audio cable usually. I'd start by replacing the cable, ignore marketing bluster when it comes to audio cables in reality a well made no-name cable is just as good as a branded cable just look for something with gold plated connections, cable shielding and oxygen free copper. Make sure the cable you buy isn't any longer than it needs to be as longer cables will also introduce interference. I'd also remove the rear IO plate on the board and make sure the brass nuts for the WIFI are tight with some gripless pliers. As for software if you want you can try This Driver which enables the use of any fancy software for the REaltek CODEC you want but be warned; In trying this driver myself it borked things up enough that I had to nuke the Windows install. Don't install the Nahimic suit as Windows will try to update it which will go horribly wrong, basically don't install any control panels except the Dolby Atmos ones the rest are crap/buggy and worse still you can't download a package with just one of the control panels so the setup does all kinds of additional steps to your registry that would otherwise be not done - its an extremely messy installer. As a rule, I'd advise avoiding these drivers they really aren't anything special or particularly good as the package currently stands the exceptionally messy installer realy isn't worth the risk of it messing up your registry.
 
Associate
Joined
5 Dec 2013
Posts
142
Appreciate the detail of the review but disagree strongly with your priorities and I'll be buying this board anyway.

You claim the inclusion of WiFi takes away the 'far more important' features of... a need for more than SEVEN USB-A plus one USB-C slot on the rear... and quality audio - but anyone who actually cares about their audio is NEVER using onboard motherboard audio. No exceptions. The WiFi is more important than both of these.
(and you don't mention using a WiFi 6 router - of course it won't be much better than a cheap USB WiFi dongle if you're using a WiFi 5 router)

Were the points docked for overclocking just because of your issues with Ryzen 2000? That one's fair enough I guess but not applicable for most buyers of this board who will be using 3950x, 5800x, 5950x etc. Furthermore the board deserves a huge amount of credit (and 'points') for having the best VRMs you've ever tested - and at the £200 price point.

The two criticisms I do take to heart are 1) the stupid fan header layout, and 2) the software (bloatware/spyware) which seems abhorrent but I won't be installing it at any point as I'm guessing stock RBG settings will be fine.
 

ket

ket

Associate
OP
Joined
7 Aug 2018
Posts
49
Glad you like the review, I always appreciate other viewpoints I'm not one of these delicate flowers that gets all emotional but there were specific reasons for my conclusions beyond the details I went into so I'll list them now;

1. Seven USB ports really isn't enough and I'll give a basic example. Keyboard & mouse, thats 2 USB ports gone. Happen to have a mouse mat that has LED lighting? Another USB port gone. Got a webcam and microphone? Thats two more USB ports gone. If you also happen to have a thumb drive you leave in for firmware updates theres another USB port gone for that as well. Thats 6 out of 7 ports gone right away, add to that a lot of people also have multiple external drives and one or two remaining USB ports isn't enough, not at all. We'll forget about the type C as you can plug a phone in to charge other ways.

2. I'm going to assume you know I know a great deal about audio from the detail I went into, on-board audio quality with the latest CODECs, such as the ALC1220 and ALC1200 (when implemented properly in the board design), is far, FAR, better than audio CODECs of old and does rival even the likes of an Xonar DX. Secondly, a lot of audio add-in boards today you actually want to stay away from. The likes of the Xonar AE for instance might have a fancy coat of paint with the included software but it is on a hardware level substantially inferior to an Xonar DX and even a Soar is just barely on par with a DX. Creative sound cards have been garbage for years as well, not so much because of hardware but in their case because the drivers and software are horrendously bad. Pick your poison I suppose. I've actually suggested something to one of the guys I know in my contacts, I don't know if anything will come of it but if it does it'll somewhat revitalise a forgotten area.

3. Points were deducted for OCing not just because of poor memory compatibility that other manufacturers are doing substantially better with on 2000 series CPUs but also because read, write, and copy tests are all worse than other X570 boards I've tested (all using the Kelvv BoltX 3600MHz kit) by a good 5GB/s or so and latency is about 3ns worse. In terms of real world such as gaming this can be the difference of up to about 6FPS on a 6800XT at 1080p and 4-5FPS even at 1440p. I did also test a 3700X in the Tomahawk after the review and things did not improve with memory compatibility and performance.

4. If wifi\LAN is an important factor for someone you sure as hell won't be using the on-board AX200 or Realtek 8125B you're going to be using something much higer end like a 10GbE PCIe LAN card, for all other uses 1GbE ethernet is still ample.

5. Lastly, the board was and is given credit for the VRM it uses but there are other boards with a VRM that while not as good are still perfectly adequate for running something like a 5950X and still offer a better balance overall. As I said before if the only goal is to get a board as cheap as possible that will run something like a 5950X as comfortably as possible then get the Tomahawk, otherwise there are better balanced, better performing, mainboards out there for the same money or less.
 
Associate
Joined
5 Dec 2013
Posts
142
Good response, thanks for the detail and proper arguments again.

1. Seven USB ports really isn't enough and I'll give a basic example. Keyboard & mouse, thats 2 USB ports gone. Happen to have a mouse mat that has LED lighting? Another USB port gone. Got a webcam and microphone? Thats two more USB ports gone. If you also happen to have a thumb drive you leave in for firmware updates theres another USB port gone for that as well. Thats 6 out of 7 ports gone right away, add to that a lot of people also have multiple external drives and one or two remaining USB ports isn't enough, not at all. We'll forget about the type C as you can plug a phone in to charge other ways.

I'll just have disagree on that one, that's a LOT of usb slots already plus any decent case will have several more on the front too (on mine 2 USB3.0, 2 USB2.0, 1 USB-C). If I'm counting correctly that's a total of 13 slots - genuinely don't understand how anyone could exceed that.

2. I'm going to assume you know I know a great deal about audio from the detail I went into, on-board audio quality with the latest CODECs, such as the ALC1220 and ALC1200 (when implemented properly in the board design), is far, FAR, better than audio CODECs of old and does rival even the likes of an Xonar DX. Secondly, a lot of audio add-in boards today you actually want to stay away from. The likes of the Xonar AE for instance might have a fancy coat of paint with the included software but it is on a hardware level substantially inferior to an Xonar DX and even a Soar is just barely on par with a DX. Creative sound cards have been garbage for years as well, not so much because of hardware but in their case because the drivers and software are horrendously bad. Pick your poison I suppose. I've actually suggested something to one of the guys I know in my contacts, I don't know if anything will come of it but if it does it'll somewhat revitalise a forgotten area.

You definitely know much more about audio codecs and motherboard audio than me. As for sound cards my only experience was a Xonar DG which was great but stopped working eventually.

Fair play, it does seem MSI cut costs and could do better in that regard then. To be honest it just irks me when people bash an entire motherboard for something like this but in this case you've genuinely proven why it isn't good enough.

Personally I wouldn't use on-board audio in any scenario so it's why I see it as such a non-issue. MOTU audio interface to power speakers, headphones and receive mic/instrument input - no need for the mobo for anything. Also got a cheaper spare DAC just to avoid having to plug headphones into the mobo directly in the event I don't have the interface handy lol.

3. Points were deducted for OCing not just because of poor memory compatibility that other manufacturers are doing substantially better with on 2000 series CPUs but also because read, write, and copy tests are all worse than other X570 boards I've tested (all using the Kelvv BoltX 3600MHz kit) by a good 5GB/s or so and latency is about 3ns worse. In terms of real world such as gaming this can be the difference of up to about 6FPS on a 6800XT at 1080p and 4-5FPS even at 1440p. I did also test a 3700X in the Tomahawk after the review and things did not improve with memory compatibility and performance.

That.. is disappointing to hear. Thanks for the info I'll definitely look more at it before considering buying this board. I got a bit caught up in the obsession over this board and the extremely positive reviews regarding performance, VRMs and overclocking. Doesn't seem to quite hold up to the hype in reality.

Change of plan now anyway, wait until these X570S (which I only just found out about) get stocked in the UK and check the pricing situation then. As the new boards will probably be overpriced, maybe try and find a heavily discounted used/B-stock X570 Aorus Master - I'm guessing you rate that board much more highly than the Tomahawk.

For 4. (wifi) I'm sure it performs the same as any AX200 WiFi 6 adapter on the market which is why I reject your criticism of it.

And as for the VRMs, this is a top priority for me but what I didn't realise was that some B550 boards rival this board on VRMs (B550 Aorus Master is actually better).

Lots of useful info here and you've probably dissuaded me from jumping on this board. Cheers
 

ket

ket

Associate
OP
Joined
7 Aug 2018
Posts
49
Good response, thanks for the detail and proper arguments again.

I'll just have disagree on that one, that's a LOT of usb slots already plus any decent case will have several more on the front too (on mine 2 USB3.0, 2 USB2.0, 1 USB-C). If I'm counting correctly that's a total of 13 slots - genuinely don't understand how anyone could exceed that.

I get where you're coming from I used to be of the same mindset once but these days I do quite easily gobble USB ports up :D When I game sometimes its keyboard + mouse, other times controller depending on the game so 3x USB ports off the bat for me, I also have a webcam and microphone so 2x more USBs there, an LED mouse mat too so one more USB, pen drive for firmware updates and my digital camera. In total 8x USB ports constantly in use as standard for me, add other things I need to use quite regularly too like external drives, debuggers, etc and those USB ports are eaten fast. The biggest problem here though is that rear USB ports as they are coming directly from the chipset\CPU do tend to perform better than front USB ports connected via headers, with AMD at least rear USB ports are also more reliable with things like external HDDs not suffering anywhere near as badly with constant connecting and disconnecting issues (a problem thats actually been around since the X370 chipset and googling the issue you'll find a lot on it, I mentioned it way back in the X370 days and only recently are AMD "looking into it". This is why I don't think 7 ports is enough due to those front reliability and performance reasons.

You definitely know much more about audio codecs and motherboard audio than me. As for sound cards my only experience was a Xonar DG which was great but stopped working eventually.

Fair play, it does seem MSI cut costs and could do better in that regard then. To be honest it just irks me when people bash an entire motherboard for something like this but in this case you've genuinely proven why it isn't good enough.

Personally I wouldn't use on-board audio in any scenario so it's why I see it as such a non-issue. MOTU audio interface to power speakers, headphones and receive mic/instrument input - no need for the mobo for anything. Also got a cheaper spare DAC just to avoid having to plug headphones into the mobo directly in the event I don't have the interface handy lol.

You'd be one of the few here ;) a great majority of people do use on-board audio, thats not such a bad thing now as Realteks latest CODECs work well when implemented properly and the drivers, especially if you get a board with something like Sonic Studio, Nahimic, or Dolby Digital actually offer more than what you'll get from current add-in solutions, which is a rather sad commentary and why I still have an Xonar DX. An ALC1220 on an add-in PCB with dual layer power shielding along with a 600 ohm headphone amp and removable op-amps combined with a Dolby Digital software suit (not the gamer version, but include the gamer tracking radar thing) would actually be a fantastic add-in solution, very good hardware capabilities, good software, and regularly updated drivers. Best of all worlds really and you could have a slightly cut down ACL1200 flavour for those that don't need to drive high imdepance headphones so the amp could be cut back to 300 ohm, both solutions should be extremely affordable if someone were to make something like that which would prove extremely popular with a huge amount of people I'd think.

That.. is disappointing to hear. Thanks for the info I'll definitely look more at it before considering buying this board. I got a bit caught up in the obsession over this board and the extremely positive reviews regarding performance, VRMs and overclocking. Doesn't seem to quite hold up to the hype in reality.

The hype with the Tomahawk all came from reviewers praising the VRMs but most didn't actually do anything more than scratch the surface with the board. What you say and I concluded in the review is quite right the board isn't bad it just doesn't hold up as well when put under real scrutiny which is a shame because the 3-4 main issues with the board are quite easily avoidable, a little more thought for the on-board audio with a semi-custom design (didn't even need the gamer orientated nahimic suit, just a solid hardware implementation), address the memory compatibility/performance (this is a firmware issue only the hardware in this area is pretty good), the really dumb fan header placement, and while not really a functional issue bt more of a "why bother if you're going to make it so limited?" is the fact so many LED lighting effects are locked in very few of them allow you to manually change their colour to go with a certain effect, eg; strobe, meteor, etc. All such effects were fully customisable with the old Mystic Light only as of the X470 Gaming Pro Carbon.

Change of plan now anyway, wait until these X570S (which I only just found out about) get stocked in the UK and check the pricing situation then. As the new boards will probably be overpriced, maybe try and find a heavily discounted used/B-stock X570 Aorus Master - I'm guessing you rate that board much more highly than the Tomahawk.

Honestly I wouldn't worry about the X570"S" boards they are minor revisions at best switching the active cooling on the chipset for a passive solution, audio might be upgraded on some boards as well but that'll be about the extent of any major changes most likely, if you can call those changes major. As for Gigabyte, how can I put this? I've never had anything personal against them but I have challenged a lot of their quite frankly lazy and bad practices and the last review I started on the X570 Aorus Pro saw GB launch personal attacks at me for raising criticisms like the board being advertised with a dual BIOS feature but in reality, and I'm not saying this is true for all revisions just the board I had to look at, was missing the backup ROM it physically was not soldered on the board. This lead to some GB rep, along with some buddies of theirs who are also reps for the likes of EVGAs XOC, doing a behind the scenes hit campaign (more like bribery and threats) to the mods on a FB group getting me kicked from said group. I'll finish the Aorus Pro review, and theres more I could say about this story, but yeah, I'll let you decide if thats the sort of company you want to buy from.

For 4. (wifi) I'm sure it performs the same as any AX200 WiFi 6 adapter on the market which is why I reject your criticism of it.

Thats fair enough to each their own I just don't see why the inclusion of it is necessary when you could add at least 2 more USB ports instead which by their very nature of being modular could be used for your own USB wifi\bluetooth if you choose to go that route while still offering other options thanks to the extra USB ports depending on the individuals needs, just makes more sense to appeal to as wide of an audience as possible rather than pidgeon hole yourself.

And as for the VRMs, this is a top priority for me but what I didn't realise was that some B550 boards rival this board on VRMs (B550 Aorus Master is actually better).

Lots of useful info here and you've probably dissuaded me from jumping on this board. Cheers

Yeah there are some solid B550 boards out there the only problem I have with B550 is that PCIe 4.0 is very limited on those boards which will hamstring PCIe 4.0 M.2 SSDs especially and the chipset overall for something that is meant to be "mainstream" is really rather absurdly expensive. If you're looking at B550 I'd rather pick up something like an X470 Taichi or X470 Asus Crosshair Hero VII on ebay and pocket the saving for something else considering X470 will run 5000 series CPUs with just a firmware update.
 
Associate
Joined
1 Oct 2011
Posts
11
Thanks for the review.

I was pretty set on buying this board, but I concur - a lot of the hype around it seems to be based on the VRM and excellent thermals. Audio is very important to me, and I was surprised to discover it to be average at best (weak at worst). I revisited all of the other 'trusted' review sites to find the issue has simply been ignored.

I've gone for a Gigabyte X570 Aorus Pro, which was £5 more. ✌
 
Back
Top Bottom