ASRock Rack X570D4U-2L2T Review an AMD Ryzen Server Motherboard


ASRock Rack X570D4U-2L2T Management

The out-of-band management is the standout feature of this motherboard and is handled by the ASPEED AST2500. Full KVM support is included out of the box, along with the ability to perform BIOS and BMC upgrades from within the web GUI. 

ASRock Rack X570D4U 2L2T BMC Dashboard
ASRock Rack X570D4U 2L2T BMC Dashboard

The KVM is available via HTML5 or Java, and one small perk over the Supermicro HTML5 client is the ability to easily mount CD/DVD ISO media directly from the HTML5 KVM client. Since the inclusion of the BMC is the defining feature of this motherboard, executing this feature well is a must and the solution on the X570D4U-2L2T mostly works well and does not require any additional licensing for full functionality. 

New to the X570 boards over the X470 predecessors is the ability to access the BIOS settings themselves via the BMC. On the X570D4I-2T this functionality was partially broken, presenting only a subset of the options available in the full preboot BIOS and never updating the system inventory; on the X570D4U-2L2T the remote BIOS is completely broken, and simply fails to load any functional user interface.

This remote BIOS may be web implementation atop a Redfish API, but I was unable to verify anything other than the non-functionality of the web UI. Redfish is not mentioned in any of ASRock Rack’s documentation nor specifications, and so this feature remains entirely undocumented.

ASRock Rack X570D4U 2L2T Remote BIOS
ASRock Rack X570D4U 2L2T Remote BIOS

Additionally, the BMC exhibited the same slow transfer speeds for mounted media that previous ASRock Rack series boards demonstrated on both the HTML5 and Java iKVM clients. Despite the BMC itself being linked to the network at 1GbE rates, transfer speeds were still very slow. This behavior was identical to the X570D4I-2T, and the BMC remote media seemed artificially limited to 1.39 MB/s.

ASRock Rack X570D4U 2L2T Slow Media
ASRock Rack X570D4U 2L2T Slow Media

As a sanity check, I performed the same test on an older Supermicro X10SRL-F board which ran at above 6 MB/s, so even in the context of other ASPEED BMC implementations, the ASRock Rack remote media is slow.

Supermicro BMC Networking
Supermicro BMC Networking

ASRock Rack has again adjusted the default number of remote media instances; this time, set to zero by default. This does mean that users will have to adjust this setting in the BMC UI to enable remote media support, since without any remote media instances enabled the options to mount a virtual ISO are missing.

Overall, this is a fairly standard MegaRAC SP-X management solution. Having the ability to utilize remote iKVM on the platform as well as perform tasks such as remote power cycling and use management tools is a key feature of this platform.

ASRock Rack X570D4U-2L2T Test Configuration

Here is the basic test configuration we used:

  • System: ASRock Rack X570D4U-2L2T
  • CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 3600, 3950X
  • Memory: 2x Crucial 16GB ECC UDIMMs
  • OS SSD: Samsung 970 EVO Plus 250GB

In the future, the AMD Ryzen 5000 series may become a more popular option, but giving pricing and availability, it seems as though the Ryzen 3000 series is going to be more popular in the short-term.

ASRock Rack X570D4U-2L2T Server OS Testing

Like the previous ASRock Rack Ryzen-based server boards X470D4U before it, the X570D4U-2L2T has a very small list of officially supported operating systems; this list consists of Windows 10, Ubuntu 18.04, and RHEL 8.1. This list is at least includes newer versions of Ubuntu and RHEL than the previous motherboards. Just as before, we undertook the task of testing various other operating systems that are not on this list. This testing is not comprehensive; operating systems were installed and tested for basic functionality but not much more. Potential purchasers would want to verify their particular OS and applications work on this platform before investing in the widespread deployment of this solution. With that said, we were able to install and operate the following list of operating systems without issue:

  • Windows 10 x64 2004
  • Windows Server 2019
  • Ubuntu 20.04.4
  • CentOS 8.1.1911
  • VMware ESXi 6.7 Update 3
  • FreeNAS 11.3-U2

Next, we are going to discuss performance and power consumption before getting to our final thoughts on the platform.


  1. “One note, the shared interface for the AST2500 is on the 10 GbE NIC, not the 1 GbE NIC.”

    A word of warning that if you accidentally enable IPMI access to the 10 GbE NIC (eg. selecting link aggregation in the IPMI settings), it will wreak havoc with performance on that interface.

    I spent weeks trying pfSense tuning settings to figure out why performance was nowhere near 10 Gbps. It was only by accident that I noticed the IPMI setting and turned it off.

  2. Any comment on the lack of ECC report support?
    Will it still be able to correct smaller bit errors, don’t even know if ECC is capable of that?
    In my +25 year in the IT business I cannot remember I have ever ran into a computer that had corrupted modules in a way where ECC would have seemed to make any difference. As fare I can remember it has always been a matter of boot errors or the computer couldn’t see the module at all. Not saying it couldn’t be the case, but I can’t remember I’ve ran into the situation myself.

  3. Anyone has distributor in EU that could offer combo with chassis for this baby? If they can do QA before shiiping, I’m all in.


  4. “One note, the shared interface for the AST2500 is on the 10 GbE NIC, not the 1 GbE NIC.”

    Any particular reason why they did so ? 1 GbE was not enough for IPMI ?

  5. domih,
    I assume it was so that, under the assumption you only had a single available switch port to plug the server in with, that you could have both 10 GbE and IPMI access.

  6. @Datasaver/@Will Taillac:
    Both my Xeon D-15xx Boards draw more Power than servethehome has measured. I always wondered what I am doing wrong in configuring the systems, as power consumption is important for me.

    My X10SDV-TP8F idles at 26W with everything stripped except for 2*32GB RAM, a single mSATA-SSD and a small FAN at low revs. I use a 300W Gold PSU. “Power off/BMC only” is 7.5W in this configuration. Servethehome has measured 22.9W/4.9W for the X10SDV-4C+-TP4F in a test configuration with double the RAM and many SSDs. If I move closer to the test configuration used for the review of the board, I am at >30W/10W.
    I wonder where the difference comes from, especially since even if I assume that servethehome is measuring power with a simple configuration, at least my BMC only values are to high. One can argue that my board has an additional quad port i350 NIC, but even the X10SDV-7TP8F was measured at only 5.0W and it has my configuration +12 Cores +SAS-HBA

  7. @cspguy: RDIMMs are not supported on Ryzen or Threadripper, you have to go to EPYC to get RDIMM support. There’s nothing ASRock Rack can do about this, it’s a limitation from AMD.

  8. This board will do 3200M/T memory, as long as its only two sticks, according to Asrock. 4 sticks is 2933 if single rank, 2667 if dual rank (if i read their response correctly). They also confirmed that Ryzen 5000 support is coming sometime December or January.

    How would this board do in a workstation? I’ve been trying to make a compact desktop for work and gaming with 10gbe, but available components are sparse. Next best solution is some finagling with a pcie extender to make room for the chunky gpu.

  9. Hello,

    Does the motherboard includes an integrated, non-removable, backplate on the socket as the X570-D4I-2T ?

    Thanks !

  10. @Elsa,
    Yes. But it’s a standard AM4 backplate design, nothing Intel flavored like on the X570D4I-2T. The stock Ryzen 3600 cooler mounts just fine (wraith spire), as does the Wraith Prism.

    As a workstation board, this will do fine, though perhaps not better than any other X570 board. The BMC doesn’t do much for a workstation. On the other hand, it may actually be the least expensive X570 board with onboard 10 GbE networking, but you can always just get a ‘normal’ X570 board and an add-on PCIe 10 GbE NIC.

  11. What i really hate, also on the X399D8A, is that anoying slow media speed via BMC. Why, Asrock??? It’s almost impossible to use that for a reasonable remote installation e.g. of anything larger than a MSDOS image. Installing Windows or also TrueNAS/FreeBSD is a pain.
    Why the heck? My old X10SL7-F and X11SSH-CTF (both having the older AST2400) are also not fast, but much more bearable.
    And also, routing the BMC via 10GB at the X11SSH-CTF does not reduce 10G speed in my case.

    So, allthough i really would like to use the Ryzen Zen2 or 3 as a multipurpose home server, the Asrock Rack AMe/TR4 boards try to mimic server boards and present lots of server features, but are lacking in the end a good implementation.
    – only partial ECC features (even my B550M Tuf Gaming reports ECC to the OS)
    – almost impossible BMC media useage
    – slow memory speeds with 4 sticks (and we all know: memory speed is important for Ryzen)
    – it seems performance problems when routing BMC over the regular NICs
    – only limited attention for Bios updates.

    So, all in all, the plattform looks attractive at the first glance, but seems to lack enthusiasm in the details then leaving it with some quirks.

  12. @ZFSfan
    My understanding of the “ECC reporting” problem is that the OS will be aware of an ECC event, but the report does not travel ‘upstream’ to the BMC/IPMI environment, where it normally would on a normal ‘server-class’ platform. Since the BMC is where many sysadmins make their first stop when investigating a potential hardware issue, lack of memory reporting in the BMC log is a big deal.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.