[wirk]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blameless

Eight true phases (vs. six with doublers on the ASRock) and potentially a controller with less overshoot/less need for vdroop. However, the ASRock setup does look like it should be able to handle more current.
I would be pretty surprised if the VRM was anywhere near the limiting factor for on either the ASUS or ASRock (or most other X99 boards) unless you shooting for some pretty insane clocks with exotic cooling.

Yeah, exotic cooling with full cover water block on the X99-E WS

.

 

[Sin0822]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TinyMan

The Asus X99-S has the following components:

Mosfets: 8x IR3550
Controller: Asus DIGI+ ASP1257
Chokes: -

So it exactly uses the same components as the Deluxe variant.

Source: ru.gecid.com/mboard/asus_x99-s/

Spoiler: Images

Yea seems to be very common, the reuse of VRM design on X99 motherboards.
ASUS, GBT, and ASRock seem to keep the VRm components on different boards n their own lines pretty much identical.

 

[Spectre-]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sin0822

Yea seems to be very common, the reuse of VRM design on X99 motherboards.
ASUS, GBT, and ASRock seem to keep the VRm components on different boards n their own lines pretty much identical.

So the X99-A , S , Pro & deluxe are using the same VRM's just charging extra for bluetooth and intergrated wifi and more plastic on the mobo

 

[Sin0822]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spectre-

So the X99-A , S , Pro & deluxe are using the same VRM's just charging extra for bluetooth and intergrated wifi and more plastic on the mobo

So looking closer the A, Pro don't seem to use the IR3550 that the RVE uses, they are using a dual MOSFET like a TI NexFET or a On Semi dual Nchannel MOSFET comparable to asrock's offering. I have to take a closer look. But the RVE seems to use IR3550, I would guess other ROG boards for X99 would also use the IR3550. I think the Deluxe uses IR3550 from early pictures, but i don't see a mention of it on the marketing from ASUS like I do for the RVE.

BTW ASRock's X99 ITE offering has 60A DrMOS and 60A choke in a 6 phase layout, I know b/c its sitting right here.

 

[CrazyElf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sin0822

So looking closer the A, S, Pro don't seem to use the IR3550 that the RVE uses, they are using a dual MOSFET like a TI NexFET or a On Semi dual Nchannel MOSFET comparable to asrock's offering. I have to take a closer look. But the RVE seems to use IR3550, I would guess other ROG boards for X99 would also use the IR3550. I think the Deluxe uses IR3550 from early pictures, but i don't see a mention of it on the marketing from ASUS like I do for the RVE.

BTW ASRock's X99 ITE offering has 60A DrMOS and 60A choke in a 6 phase layout, I know b/c its sitting right here.

The higher end MSI MPower and XPower seem to have standardized around that 55A Fairchild with 12 phases (6 doubled).

Personally right now, if I were to buy an X99 board, I'd get either the MSI X99A XPower or Asrock X99 OC Formula. The Gigabyte X99 SOC Force (and SOC Champion) are also worth looking at as well.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Spectre-

So the X99-A , S , Pro & deluxe are using the same VRM's just charging extra for bluetooth and intergrated wifi and more plastic on the mobo

It looks like it. Without the volume that Z97 has, X99 is a niche product so I guess they would have to standardize somewhat.

To be honest, I'm surprised nobody opted for any DirectFET IR6894/IR6811.

 

[dansi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sin0822

So looking closer the A, S, Pro don't seem to use the IR3550 that the RVE uses, they are using a dual MOSFET like a TI NexFET or a On Semi dual Nchannel MOSFET comparable to asrock's offering. I have to take a closer look. But the RVE seems to use IR3550, I would guess other ROG boards for X99 would also use the IR3550. I think the Deluxe uses IR3550 from early pictures, but i don't see a mention of it on the marketing from ASUS like I do for the RVE.

BTW ASRock's X99 ITE offering has 60A DrMOS and 60A choke in a 6 phase layout, I know b/c its sitting right here.

Dont the above posts shows Asus X99S using the same IR3550?

I know the Pro and A variants used different mosfet, Onsemi iirc.

So it seems Asus has 2 VRM designs, IR(RVE, Deluxe, S, WS) and Onsemi (Pro and A), and they are further differentiated by the types of chokes use.

In all, it looks like X99S is the best balance between price and VRM.

Too bad Asus is not shipping them widely.

 

[Sin0822]

yea you are right the -S seems to use the IR3550. Interesting, I hadn't seen much on that board.

 

[cloppy007]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sin0822

yea you are right the -S seems to use the IR3550. Interesting, I hadn't seen much on that board.

Seems it's EU only. I've got one.

 

[Sin0822]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cloppy007

Seems it's EU only. I've got one.

yea boards that are regional are becoming more popular

 

[TinyMan]

Yeah, after I found out that the X99-S uses the IR3550 MOSFETs for sure, I bought one

I really didn't need any WiFi capabilities or other "unnecessary" things. Just a board with high quality components and a good layout

 

[itzhoovEr]

What would be the best x99 mobo for under $250?

 

[Sin0822]

Quote:

Originally Posted by itzhoovEr

What would be the best x99 mobo for under $250?

Which boards were you considering? Most should be fine without any consequence, many manufacturers keep the VRM quality high at lower price points and decrease features, others keep same features and decrease VRM quality. However, its a case by case basis. Many manufacturers do both things. I have tested a few sub $300 boards, but I mean, its X99 and a $500-1000 CPU, why skimp out on its power delivery?

 

[Ypsylon]

Just the thread I was looking for (+great help with that Overclockers link).

First of all still waiting for my TH10A and that's just "scouting" post because upgrade will move on only after case is assembled so I can plan few things.

Pretty much firm believer that EVGA makes best motherboards around (only EVGA boards never died on me from "natural causes"). Have EVGA X99 Classified firmly in my crosshair.

Interested in thermal pads on VRMs. Should I replace them when I decide to do full repaint of radiators to match the color? Or should pads be OK after only 1 removal - I intend to do the paint job the moment I get the board. That hideous red E and some glossy black mixed with aluminium gray. Not exactly pretty.

 

[Sin0822]

You mean the thermal pad that sits on the powerstages? (on EVGA they also might cool the inductors, like the X99 Micro cools the inductors and power stages). I would use the ones provided as they are the proper thickness for good contact, I also wouldn't paint where the thermal pad meets the heatsink.

 

[Ypsylon]

No worries I intend to paint just the top and sides.

Yesterday I found Bitspower's THOR EIX99 waterblock, but man it's extremely tight fit near first PCI-Ex. Removing VGA would be borderline impossible. I wonder if I could just use VRM section and some universal chipset block (like Watercool Heatkiller 3). Much more practical than that full-cover (not quite mono) block.

 

[Sin0822]

yea there isn't much point in a PCH block for this platform, VRm block makes much more sense. That is a crazy tight fit.

 

[Ypsylon]

Frankly I don't know what was reason behind construction like that. Without top section you could access first slot release somewhat difficult but in a doable way. With fully assembled block that's freaking impossible... Wait a sec.

On FTW It would just as bad (but default radiators aren't linked with heat-pipe actually much more practical). WTH Bitspower was thinking, gosh... At 160$ (or Euro here in EU) it's silly and first thing you need to do is to trim that top "armor" shield so you can access M.2 slot or battery.

Really painting should suffice, investing 160 Euro to chop and change brand new stuff, not that mad.

 

[Blameless]

Anyone have the more detailed datasheets for the IR3556? Specifically I'm looking for the efficiency/power loss vs. switching frequency curve.

 

[CrazyElf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blameless

Anyone have the more detailed datasheets for the IR3556? Specifically I'm looking for the efficiency/power loss vs. switching frequency curve.

It's a pretty new PowIRstage, and I think it might have been the IR3551 successor (Sin, can you confirm this?).

All I can find is this:
http://www.irf.com/part/Integrated-PowIRstage-is-a-synchronous-buck-gate-driver-IC-with-co-packed-control-and-synchronous-MOSFETs-and-Schottky-diode/_/A~IR3556#tab2
http://www.irf.com/product-info/datasheets/data/pb-ir3556.pdf

I think that it may be behind an access restricted data sheet.

Edit Digikey doesn't have one either:
http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/IR3556MTRPBF/IR3556MTRPBF-ND/5027997

Package layout, although that won't help much:
http://www.irf.com/package/outline/po-pqfn6x6.pdf

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sin0822

yea there isn't much point in a PCH block for this platform, VRm block makes much more sense. That is a crazy tight fit.

I think the PCH is like only 8W TDP so yeah, it makes little sense.

VRM though I think is worth considering, especially for higher OCs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vlada011

Where is best VRM/mosfet on X99, Rampage 5 Extreme?
ASRock X99M Killer look good too.

Rampage V Extreme is 8x IR3555.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ypsylon

Frankly I don't know what was reason behind construction like that. Without top section you could access first slot release somewhat difficult but in a doable way. With fully assembled block that's freaking impossible... Wait a sec.

On FTW It would just as bad (but default radiators aren't linked with heat-pipe actually much more practical). WTH Bitspower was thinking, gosh... At 160$ (or Euro here in EU) it's silly and first thing you need to do is to trim that top "armor" shield so you can access M.2 slot or battery.

Really painting should suffice, investing 160 Euro to chop and change brand new stuff, not that mad.

Yeah I'm not sure why they do it that way either.

I wish they would just go with the old style of copper heatsink designed to maximize surface area (and thus cooling performance).

Something like this:


It's practical and they could always paint the copper if needed.

The only gripe I have about the image above is that the water cooling should be on the VRMs.

 

[Blameless]

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrazyElf

I think that it may be behind an access restricted data sheet.

Yeah. The older parts like the IR3550 have full datasheets publically available, but not the newer parts, apparently.

Doing some tuning on one of my boards to shave off power wherever possible, and the efficiency slope would be handy for me to see where the point of diminishing returns are with things like switching frequency and input/output voltage.
Quote:

Originally Posted by CrazyElf

I think it might have been the IR3551 successor

Looks like it. The 3556 has a much wider output voltage range, but most other specs are the same and the 3551 material should be useful reference.
Quote:

Originally Posted by CrazyElf

I wish they would just go with the old style of copper heatsink designed to maximize surface area (and thus cooling performance).

I definitely prefer, functional, finned, heatsinks over the largely decorative blocks most boards have.

However, no need for copper at these power densities; aluminum is plenty sufficient.