AORUS X499 Motherboards for Next-Gen Intel Core X HEDT CPUs Uncovered

[Tsing]

GIGABYTE didn’t do a very good job of hiding its new motherboards for Intel’s upcoming Core X processors. Wccftech spotted three parts with the X299G label at the company’s AORUS booth at Computex, but they turned out to be X499 boards after closer inspection.

The three motherboards are the X499 AORUS Xtreme Waterforce, X499 AORUS Master, and X499 Designare-10G. The Waterforce is a high-end board offering a water block and 16-phase VRM, while the Master has a 12-phase VRM with fin-based heatsinks. The Designare-10G also has a 12-phase VRM and is the most modest-looking board of the bunch, targeting content creators.

The Master and Designare-10G carry four PCIe 3.0 x16 slots, while the Waterforce only has three. All the boards feature three M.2 slots, however.

There’s a lot more that needs to be confirmed about the X499 platform if whether that’s the final naming scheme or what additional features does it have over the existing X299 motherboard lineup. We can’t say for sure if X499 is just a rebadged X299 so we are better off waiting for some official PCH and platform details from Intel themselves during the second half of 2019.

 

[Dan_D]

GIGABYTE's lineup is looking good. I am especially fond of that Waterforce board.

 

[alxlwson]

****, that Waterforce board is sexy!
Never owned a Gigabyte board. Never owned a board not Asus except for the DFI board I had for AthlonXP. I wonder if we'll see something like this for Ryzen

 

[Dan_D]

****, that Waterforce board is sexy!
Never owned a Gigabyte board. Never owned a board not Asus except for the DFI board I had for AthlonXP. I wonder if we'll see something like this for Ryzen

Maybe. The boards with built in water blocks are starting to show up from multiple manufacturers. I can't wait to get my hands on some of them even though they'll make testing a bit more difficult for me. As for GIGABYTE, they've tested well for me for some time now. However, the board I'm currently using is the first GIGABYTE board I've personally owned. Same goes for the video card. So far, both have been nothing short of excellent. ASUS was always my personal go-to but I can't stand their ever bloating software. This GIGABYTE configuration feels lean by comparison.

 

[alxlwson]

Maybe. The boards with built in water blocks are starting to show up from multiple manufacturers. I can't wait to get my hands on some of them even though they'll make testing a bit more difficult for me. As for GIGABYTE, they've tested well for me for some time now. However, the board I'm currently using is the first GIGABYTE board I've personally owned. Same goes for the video card. So far, both have been nothing short of excellent. ASUS was always my personal go-to but I can't stand their ever bloating software. This GIGABYTE configuration feels lean by comparison.

Hmm. I think I might look at an x570 board when Zen2 drops. I was on a slight budget when I did this current 2600X build and went with a Strix x470 instead of the CH VII and everything feels so lacking after coming from a Maximus z170 and 6600K in the old system. It did the benefit of opening me up to the possibility of other boards manufacturers though. I'm sure Gigabyte will have something!

 

[Grebuloner]

What's with the lack of expansion slots? Saw the same on many X570 boards. Some of us really like using the x1's/x4's for AICs.

 

[Dan_D]

What's with the lack of expansion slots? Saw the same on many X570 boards. Some of us really like using the x1's/x4's for AICs.

Honestly, I don't think they are needed. Multi-GPU has fallen out of fashion and there are still 3x PCIe x16 slots to use for whatever devices you need. There is no reason why a shorter card can't go into the longer slot. Plus, with the primary GPU slot, you'd end up covering two out of three PCIe x1's in a lot of cases anyway.

 

[Grebuloner]

Honestly, I don't think they are needed. Multi-GPU has fallen out of fashion and there are still 3x PCIe x16 slots to use for whatever devices you need. There is no reason why a shorter card can't go into the longer slot. Plus, with the primary GPU slot, you'd end up covering two out of three PCIe x1's in a lot of cases anyway.

I guess I fall into the niche of people who like to use their expansion slots.

I will agree that any slot right below the top x16 is dumb considering they don't seem to be making any more single-slot midrange GPUs (even the low-wattage ones need 3 slots now?), I liked when manufacturers used to put an x1 on the very top for a short networking or sound card to compensate.

 

[Dan_D]

I guess I fall into the niche of people who like to use their expansion slots.

I will agree that any slot right below the top x16 is dumb considering they don't seem to be making any more single-slot midrange GPUs (even the low-wattage ones need 3 slots now?), I liked when manufacturers used to put an x1 on the very top for a short networking or sound card to compensate.

I like to use them too. I have an Intel SSD 750 1.2TB for games and a Intel X540 converged 10GbE network adapter in the other. My graphics card is a non-reference design that eats up 3x PCIe slots. However, I can't even imagine a scenario outside of GPU mining where you would need all seven spaces and as you said, even mid-range modern GPUs eat up at least 2 (not 3). An x1 or x4 above the primary x16 PCIe expansion slot would be nice but that's about the only way to make that work. Four seems like plenty for most people especially when 3 out of 4 or 4 out of 4 can all support dual-slot devices.

And if you cut out two expansion slots below the primary, you'd still only be left with 4 remaining in the ATX form factor. Its not as bad as people make it out to be. Most of the people that will scream about this probably don't have more than one or two expansion cards in use besides the graphics card either.