Monday, November 26th 2018

ASRock Intros X399 Phantom Gaming 6 Motherboard for AMD Threadripper X

by
Raevenlord
 Discuss (11 Comments)
ASRock today launched the X399 Phantom Gaming 6, its latest addition to the popular Phantom Gaming series for AMD Ryzen Threadripper processors. Note that this board only supports up to 16-core Threadripper models, the 24-core and 32-core Threadripper WX series are not supported. The Phantom Gaming features premium components (power delivery is kept clean and stable with Digital PWM, 8 Power Phase & Dr. MOS)and a relatively subdued, black-gray-red design - and like most hardware these days, it's gamer-oriented and branded. 2.5 Gbps Ethernet is one of the key features as ASRock paints it, and there is a grand total of 3x Ultra M.2 connectors and a full-length 22110 (110 mm) slot with full-coverage heatsink.
With the addition of all those M.2 slots, though, PCIe took a beating, with only 3x PCIe x16 slots present on this motherboard. All of these are reinforced (the RAM slots aren't) There's RGB lighting with ASRock's Polychrome SYNC solution, Creative-powered audio in the form of the Sound Blaster Cinema 5 (a Realtek ALC 1220 codec really) and 8x SATA 6 Gbps ports. The X399 Phantom Gaming 6 is VR ready, and features USB 3.1 Type-A and Type-C on the I/O connectors.

For more information, visit the product page.
Source: ASRock

Related News

Add your own comment

11 Comments on ASRock Intros X399 Phantom Gaming 6 Motherboard for AMD Threadripper X

#1
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
Oh so the whole we don't support high end amd processors movement has begun again.
Posted on Reply
#2
TheLostSwede
News Editor
It would be interesting to see a bit more detail on how that network testing was done.
Posted on Reply
#3
coonbro
cdawallOh so the whole we don't support high end amd processors movement has begun again.
maybe like how intel took away xeon support from use in ''gaming '' boards ? seems that xeon support along with I-5 I-7 ended with z97 . I guess if you want to use them wx chips your going to use a workstation board ? YA, that was pretty cheap of intel I like the xeon on this z87 over the I-5 for the hyperthreading at I-5 prices [+/ a tad ] .

today you build as they want not as you need like it use to be [ then you do get all that led lighting in return , right ? ]
Posted on Reply
#4
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
coonbromaybe like how intel took away xeon support from use in ''gaming '' boards ? seems that xeon support along with I-5 I-7 ended with z97 . I guess if you want to use them wx chips your going to use a workstation board ? YA, that was pretty cheap of intel I like the xeon on this z87 over the I-5 for the hyperthreading at I-5 prices [+/ a tad ] .

today you build as they want not as you need like it use to be [ then you do get all that led lighting in return , right ? ]
This isn't barring opterons from a desktop board. This is barring HEDT chips from a HEDT board. Literally nothing like Intels move.
Posted on Reply
#5
coonbro
maybe but still A your not going to use it on that all the same . then let me know when a opteron is listed heck the optron was dead / died back in the 990 fx days on a gaming board as well best I recall like a AM3+Opteron 3200 and hard to find and get if you even wanted that
Posted on Reply
#6
DeathtoGnomes
cdawallOh so the whole we don't support high end amd processors movement has begun again.
24/32 need more power, its cheaper to limit the number of phases.
Posted on Reply
#7
Redwoodz
cdawallThis isn't barring opterons from a desktop board. This is barring HEDT chips from a HEDT board. Literally nothing like Intels move.
It's intended for HEDT. You don't need 64 threads in a desktop. Add support for more cores you need a more robust VRM(more expensive). This is not the top of the line board, it's an "entry" level X399. Want more cores by another board. What this does offer is unparelleled PCIe lane performance in the desktop while keeping cost relatively affordable for the average gamer.
Posted on Reply
#8
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
DeathtoGnomes24/32 need more power, its cheaper to limit the number of phases.
Right which is exactly what I alluded to earlier.
RedwoodzIt's intended for HEDT. You don't need 64 threads in a desktop. Add support for more cores you need a more robust VRM(more expensive). This is not the top of the line board, it's an "entry" level X399. Want more cores by another board. What this does offer is unparelleled PCIe lane performance in the desktop while keeping cost relatively affordable for the average gamer.
You don't need 3 1080ti's either, yet people do it. My comment was aimed at the fact that yet again we have eclipsed power envelopes and have to tell people that yea just because that cpu works in every single other x399 board it doesn't work with this one. That is stupid and it is one thing I appreciate Intel for. There is no x299 board that doesn't support their power hungry monsters, because Intel says you can't sell that. Little nuances like this honestly cloud amd's image.
Posted on Reply
#9
Redwoodz
No Intel may not but they dang sure make a completely different socket. Might as well make a different motherboard design for every single chip. AMD image will be clouded no matter what, from certain people.
Posted on Reply
#10
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
RedwoodzNo Intel may not but they dang sure make a completely different socket. Might as well make a different motherboard design for every single chip. AMD image will be clouded no matter what, from certain people.
HEDT and MDT are separate for both AMD and Intel. Add another pair of constantly rotating dead sockets in AMD and it's the same as the Intel nonsense. Remember AM1 and it's 3 cpu options? What about FM1/FM2/FM2+? Both companies are horribly guilty I just can't fathom selling something under the HEDT banner that's going to not support HEDT processors that are already on the market. What on earth is happening with these companies?
Posted on Reply
#11
phill
DeathtoGnomes24/32 need more power, its cheaper to limit the number of phases.
Seems daft to me if they give it more power options you'd like to think that the lower number of cored CPUs might actually have a better quality power delivery than if they limit it to 16 Cores...?? I might just be crazy mind...
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
May 8th, 2024 18:21 EDT change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts