The MSI X299M Gaming Pro Carbon AC Motherboard Review

Overclocking

Overclocking Methodology

Our standard overclocking methodology is as follows. We select the automatic overclock options and test for stability with POV-Ray and OCCT to simulate high-end workloads. These stability tests aim to catch any immediate causes for memory or CPU errors.

For manual overclocks, based on the information gathered from the previous testing, starts off at a nominal voltage and CPU multiplier, and the multiplier is increased until the stability tests are failed. The CPU voltage is increased gradually until the stability tests are passed, and the process repeated until the motherboard reduces the multiplier automatically (due to safety protocol) or the CPU temperature reaches a stupidly high level (90ºC+). Our test bed is not in a case, which should push overclocks higher with fresher (cooler) air.

Experience with the MSI X299M Gaming Pro Carbon AC

Overclocking using the MSI X299M Gaming Pro Carbon AC was a breeze from the BIOS standpoint. There wasn't any magic adding voltage in the background and when selecting different voltages, it was a WYSIWYG type of situation where LLC was not needed - the auto setting kept voltages where we set them. When we used the Game Boost function, it was a bit of a question as to what to expect. Within the BIOS, it says it will boost to 4.5 GHz (which Turbo Boost 3 does already with one core), or when selecting it from the Command Center, it says 4.4 GHz. Game Boost also sets a -3 AVX offset and disables smart fan control allowing CPU Fan 1 and  Pump Fan 1 to run full tilt for additional cooling. The end result was all cores clocking to 4.1 GHz while AVX loads were at 3.8 GHz which is a 200 MHz increase over stock clock speeds and AVX. In single threaded non-AVX loads (Super Pi) it also ran at 4.1 GHz whereas without the Game Boost enabled it ran at 4 GHz. 

MSI's Click BIOS 5 has everything one would need for tweaking the system and for overclocking. The layout is logical to me and quite ergonomic as far as where the features are which minimizes jumping around multiple sections just to overclock. All the needed multipliers and voltages are all located on one screen with more optional features a level down. 

The board did not run into any issues with either the DDR4-2666 or the DDR4-3200 sets of RAM we use for testing. Like the other X299 boards, it was 'set XMP and go'. We were able to overclock past the XMP settings of our 3200 sticks and reached DDR4-3600 speeds without issue as well. 

The Command Center software is one of the more complete windows based utilities offering monitoring and control over the system. There are options to set up custom fan curves, the integrated GPU (not that Skylake-X has one), overclocking, and even memory (though I prefer to do so in the BIOS). It even reads and displays the MOSFET temperatures which will be helpful with this board and its heatsink implementation. 

That said, the VRMs and heatsink during overclocking were hot to the touch even in our quick five-minute test. When we put it through longer testing (30 mins OCCT), the temperatures reached a finger searing 95ºC according to Command Center.  Although that is hot, I was a bit worried about the overclocking side of things, but those temperatures are well within specification. The Nikos MOSFETs used have a TjMax of a scorching 150ºC according to the data sheets (though its thresholds are set from 25-100ºC). When I put active cooling blowing directly across the heatsink, the temperature dropped to a more palatable 79ºC. Overall, the MSI X299M Gaming Pro Carbon AC is a capable overclocker like many of the boards which preceded it. I would just make sure there is active cooling on the VRMs when pushing the overclocks. 

Overclocking Results

The MSI X299M Gaming Pro Carbon AC topped out at 4.6 GHz, and we were temperature limited. There was very little or no vDrop and vDroop with LLC set to auto. All boards we have tested were very stable in that regard.  At the top overclock of 4.6 GHz and 1.152V, the system pulled 309W at the wall with the CPU itself claiming around 200W of that value.