Z170 mobo now or later? (Thunderbolt USB 3.1 / NVME M.2 sticking points)

[nibunnoichi]

I'm planning a $1500-ish Skylake build (to be complete around Q1 of 2016),
I've settled on a lot of the crucial components already:

• Core i5 6600K
• MSI Radeon R9 390 GPU
• Samsung 950 PRO Nvme m.2 SSD

But I'm unsure on a mobo. If I had to choose one right now, it would be the Gigabyte GA-Z170X-Gaming 7. I want at least two native NVME M.2 slots, which this has. For future-proofing, I really want a Thunderbolt / USB 3.1 port with the Alpine Ridge controller. From what I've read, Gigabyte has an exclusive on this controller for now. If this wasn't the case, I might go with the Asrock Z170 Extreme7+

The other issue that's giving me pause from making a purchase right now is booting (win10) from the NVME M.2 SSD drive. I'm under the impression that this new interface is still in an "immature" stage of support from mobo makers? This is especially true for previous gen Z97 boards.

Does anyone know if the current Z190 boards are completely plug-&-play issue-free regarding Nvme m.2 ssd drives? I want to be able to plug in the Samsung 950 pro, install Win10 into it, and then then boot from it for eternity with no hassle. And I want this to happen without spending too much time (none if possible) in the BIOS/UEFI or having to deal with firmware updates / flashing bios and such.

Or should I wait for 2nd-gen Z170 boards to come out (when hopefully Alpine Ridge is more standard and NVME M.2 support reach "maturity")? And if so, when would that be?


Thanks for any insight.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

But I'm unsure on a mobo. If I had to choose one right now, it would be the Gigabyte GA-Z170X-Gaming 7. I want at least two native NVME M.2 slots, which this has. For future-proofing, I really want a Thunderbolt / USB 3.1 port with the Alpine Ridge controller. From what I've read, Gigabyte has an exclusive on this controller for now. If this wasn't the case, I might go with the Asrock Z170 Extreme7+

The GA-Z170X Gaming 7 might have two M.2 slots, but unfortunately you'll only be able to make effective use of only one of them.

Problem is that both slots share bandwidth on the DMI link to the PCH, which is only a single PCIe 3.0 x4 link.

A solution is simply to connect one of the drives to one of the slots coming of the CPU, which you can do on pretty much any board. The downside is that you're cutting bandwidth to your graphics card in half, and this requires an adaptor. But it should only loose around 1% performance for a single card.

 

[zir_blazer]

Why not LGA 2011-3? Your budget should allow it.

 

[nibunnoichi]

The GA-Z170X Gaming 7 might have two M.2 slots, but unfortunately you'll only be able to make effective use of only one of them.

Problem is that both slots share bandwidth on the DMI link to the PCH, which is only a single PCIe 3.0 x4 link.

A solution is simply to connect one of the drives to one of the slots coming of the CPU, which you can do on pretty much any board. The downside is that you're cutting bandwidth to your graphics card in half, and this requires an adaptor. But it should only loose around 1% performance for a single card.

From what I've read, the 2nd M.2 slot only shares bandwidth with the last PCIe x16 slot, and that's the tradeoff. I can either have a 2nd M.2 drive, or something in the last PCIe x16 slot. But I can certainly have two M.2 ssd drives going at once.

 

[nibunnoichi]

Why not LGA 2011-3? Your budget should allow it.

Not with the rest of what I'm putting int my build. PCpartpicker already has me going slightly over-budget.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

From what I've read, the 2nd M.2 slot only shares bandwidth with the last PCIe x16 slot, and that's the tradeoff. I can either have a 2nd M.2 drive, or something in the last PCIe x16 slot. But I can certainly have two M.2 ssd drives going at once.

That's not what I'm trying to say. Of course you can use two M.2 drives, or any other PCIe drive for that matter, no problem. But the DMI 3.0 link only has bandwidth enough for one. If you f.x. use two 950PRO's, The bandwidth is only sufficient for around 1.5 of them. 2x 2500MB/s, when the link only has ~4000MB/s available theoretically (and it'll be lower in practice). Never mind everything else connected to the PCH, has to share that bandwidth too. Thing like ethernet, 5/10Gbit/s USB3, HDDs etc.

tomshardware did a good demonstration of DMI bandwidth a while back. Keep in mind the testing was done with the older DMI 2.0 link. But if you go fast enough the same principle is true for Skylake.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/samsung-xp941-z97-pci-express,3826-3.html
and
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-dc-s3500-raid-performance,3613.html

I hope that makes better sense.

 

[Dahak]

To make it a bit more clear, the DMI link is the connection between the chipset and the CPU. Not between the m.2 drives and the chipset.

The way Insert Nickname explained it, it reads that the dmi link is between the m.2 drives and the chipset.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

To make it a bit more clear, the DMI link is the connection between the chipset and the CPU. Not between the m.2 drives and the chipset.

The way Insert Nickname explained it, it reads that the dmi link is between the m.2 drives and the chipset.

Whoops...

Yes, I should have made that clearer. You're correct of course.

 

[nibunnoichi]

Thanks Insert_Nickname, I did some research into this DMI 3.0 link and it was very enlightening.

I get what you're saying now. So if I want to make full use of two high-end SSD's, the second drive should use one of the PCIe X16 slots, correct?

So for example, I can have one Samsung 950 pro in a M.2 slot, and a Intel 750 PCIe SSD, in the second PCIe x16 slot, and have them both run at their max potential? (In the Gigabyte Gaming 7 board, the first two PCIe x16 slots are linked to the CPU directly, not to the Z170 chipset). With the trade-off being that I can only have a single GPU card which runs at x8.

In fact, maybe it would be better to not use the m.2 slot at all since so many things share bandwidth with it. Instead, rely on a PCIe x16 SSD as the primary drive for booting, OS, and programs? The PCIe x16 drive would seems to have much better dedicated bandwidth, competing only with the GPU. What do you think? (for a rig that's dedicated to photo edittng - Adobe Photoshop CC, Lightroom CC, etc)?


On an aside, where does USB 3.1 / alpine ridge fit into this scheme? Looking at this diagram:

It doesn't mention anything about USB 3.1, thunderbolt, or alpine ridge.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

I get what you're saying now. So if I want to make full use of two high-end SSD's, the second drive should use one of the PCIe X16 slots, correct?

In short, yes.

So for example, I can have one Samsung 950 pro in a M.2 slot, and a Intel 750 PCIe SSD, in the second PCIe x16 slot, and have them both run at their max potential? (In the Gigabyte Gaming 7 board, the first two PCIe x16 slots are linked to the CPU directly, not to the Z170 chipset). With the trade-off being that I can only have a single GPU card which runs at x8.

That's the way to do it. There'll be a small performance penalty for your graphics card of course. But its in the 1-2% range at the maximum, so the impact is negligible.

Coincidently, this is what I'm doing on my Ivy Bridge system. There is no noticeable difference with a 970 between PCIe 3.0 x8 and x16, unless you really, really benchmark for it.

In fact, maybe it would be better to not use the m.2 slot at all since so many things share bandwidth with it. Instead, rely on a PCIe x16 SSD as the primary drive for booting, OS, and programs? The PCIe x16 drive would seems to have much better dedicated bandwidth, competing only with the GPU. What do you think? (for a rig that's dedicated to photo edittng - Adobe Photoshop CC, Lightroom CC, etc)?

The ultimate solution is of course to go X99(*1) which has 40(*2) lanes directly from the CPU. But that's more expensive of course. If you only have a single PCIe SSD connected to the PCH, there should be enough bandwidth to go around. Just make sure to Install the OS to the SSD connected directly to the CPU, there is a small benefit to a dedicated link.

*1 X99 doesn't necessarily mean 5820K, 5930K and 5960X. There are plenty of very nice Xeons available, which fit into standard consumer X99 boards. Since you're primarily photoshopping, I think a case could be made for a Xeon E5-1620v3. But mainboards are quite a bit more expensive.
*2 Only 28 for the 5820K.

On an aside, where does USB 3.1 / alpine ridge fit into this scheme? Looking at this diagram:

It doesn't mention anything about USB 3.1, thunderbolt, or alpine ridge.

I'm speculating the Alpine Ridge controller is connected to some of the PCIe lanes coming of the PCH. But it is just that, speculation.

 

[Bearmann]

I think this Asus Maximus Hero VIII Alpha has what you want:

http://www.maximumpc.com/asus-rog-outs-maximus-viii-hero-alpha-mobo/

http://rog.asus.com/453372015/label...-of-gamers-announces-maximus-viii-hero-alpha/

http://www.wegotserved.com/2015/11/23/asus-rog-announces-z170-maximus-viii-hero-alpha/

http://hexus.net/tech/news/mainboard/88334-asus-rog-maximus-viii-hero-alpha-significant-upgrades/

 

[nibunnoichi]

I think this Asus Maximus Hero VIII Alpha has what you want:

http://www.maximumpc.com/asus-rog-outs-maximus-viii-hero-alpha-mobo/

http://rog.asus.com/453372015/label...-of-gamers-announces-maximus-viii-hero-alpha/

http://www.wegotserved.com/2015/11/23/asus-rog-announces-z170-maximus-viii-hero-alpha/

http://hexus.net/tech/news/mainboard/88334-asus-rog-maximus-viii-hero-alpha-significant-upgrades/

Thanks for the heads up. Depending on price and reviews I may go for this instead.

 

[nibunnoichi]

In short, yes.

That's the way to do it. There'll be a small performance penalty for your graphics card of course. But its in the 1-2% range at the maximum, so the impact is negligible.

After a bit more research, I think I've found an even more optimal solution: Put the Samsung 950 pro into a M.2 to PCI-E adapter, and put that in the second PCIEx16 slot of the mobo. That way I can take advantage of the the higher performance of the 950 pro (vs the Intel 750), and have dedicated lanes to the CPU.

Just need to make sure I can install & boot off this arrangement (from reviews, looks like it will)

 

[MrTeal]

The link between the Z170 chipset is x4 PCIe, but in what cases is that actually used? If you're reading from the m.2 to main memory it would be over DMI, but if you were copying one m.2 to the other would that actually make it off the Z170 or would it be handled by a DMA controller?

Unless you're planning on running RAID on the two PCIe m.2, it might be pretty uncommon to actually try to pull full x4 bandwidth from both drives anyway. It'd be neat to see some testing on it.

 

[Burpo]

i think this asus maximus hero viii alpha has what you want:

http://www.maximumpc.com/asus-rog-outs-maximus-viii-hero-alpha-mobo/

http://rog.asus.com/453372015/label...-of-gamers-announces-maximus-viii-hero-alpha/

http://www.wegotserved.com/2015/11/23/asus-rog-announces-z170-maximus-viii-hero-alpha/

http://hexus.net/tech/news/mainboard/88334-asus-rog-maximus-viii-hero-alpha-significant-upgrades/

Shwing!

 

[Insert_Nickname]

After a bit more research, I think I've found an even more optimal solution: Put the Samsung 950 pro into a M.2 to PCI-E adapter, and put that in the second PCIEx16 slot of the mobo. That way I can take advantage of the the higher performance of the 950 pro (vs the Intel 750), and have dedicated lanes to the CPU.

That's exactly what I've been advocating.

It seems we have talked past one another...

The link between the Z170 chipset is x4 PCIe, but in what cases is that actually used? If you're reading from the m.2 to main memory it would be over DMI, but if you were copying one m.2 to the other would that actually make it off the Z170 or would it be handled by a DMA controller?

Unless you're planning on running RAID on the two PCIe m.2, it might be pretty uncommon to actually try to pull full x4 bandwidth from both drives anyway. It'd be neat to see some testing on it.

See post #6 in this thread.