Intel 925X Roundup: Creative Engineering 101
by Wesley Fink on August 12, 2004 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Standard Performance Test Configuration
If you are interested in more information comparing the LGA 775 Prescott, Athlon 64, Athlon 64 FX, P4, and P4EE, please see our in-depth comparisons in the recent reviews:Intel's 925X & LGA-775: Are Prescott 3.6 and PCI Express Graphics any Faster?
Intel 925X/915: Chipset Performance & DDR2
Socket 939 Chipsets: Motherboard Performance & PCI/AGP Locks
AMD Athlon 64 3800+ and FX-53: The First 939 CPUs
The Athlon 64 FX-53: AMD's Next Enthusiast Part
Intel's Pentium 4 E: Prescott Arrives with Luggage
Athlon64 3400+: Part 2
AMD's Athlon 64 3400+: Death of the FX-51
Athlon64 3000+: 64-bit at Half the Price
| Performance Test Configuration | |
| Processor(s): | Intel 560 (3.6GHz) Socket 775 AMD FX53 (2.4GHz) Socket 939 |
| RAM: | 2 x 512MB Crucial/Micron DDR2 533 2 x 512MB OCZ PC3200 Platinum Rev.2 (Samsung 2-2-2-5) |
| Hard Drive(s): | 2 x 250GB Maxtor MaXLine III (16MB Cache) in SATA RAID Seagate 120GB 7200RPM SATA (8Mb buffer) |
| Video AGP & IDE Bus Master Drivers: | Intel Chipset Driver 6.0.0.1014 Intel Application Accelerator 4.0.0.6211 NVIDIA nForce version 4.24 |
| Video Card(s): | nVidia GeForce 6800 Ultra PCIe nVidia GeForce 6800 Ultra AGP 8X |
| Video Drivers: | nVidia 61.77 Graphics Drivers |
| Operating System(s): | Windows XP Professional SP1 |
| Power Supply: | HiPro 470W (Intel) OCZ Power Stream 520W Enermax 465W |
| Motherboards: | Abit AA8 (925X) Asus P5AD2 Premium (925X) DFI LANParty 925X-T2 (925X) Foxconn 925X-A01 (925X) Gigabyte 8ANXP-D (925X) Intel 925XCV (Intel 925X) Socket 775 Intel 915GUX (Intel 915G) Socket 775 MSI K8N Neo2 (nForce3-250 Ultra) Socket 939 |
925X/915 tests used either Crucial PC2-4300U or Micron PC2-4300U memory modules. These are basically the same memory. DDR2 was run at 3-3-3-10 timings, at default voltage, which are faster timings than the SPD 4-4-4-12. Tests of the FX53 used OCZ PC3200 Platinum Rev.2, which is based on Samsung memory chips, at 2-2-2-5 memory timings at JEDEC standard 2.6V.
The nVidia 6800 Ultra was used for all 925X/915 benchmarking, and the AGP 8X 6800 Ultra was used for FX53 tests. This allows for better comparison of all results, since the 9800 PRO is not available in a PCIe configuration. All performance tests were run with AGP Aperture set to 128MB with Fast Write enabled. Resolution in all benchmarks is 1024x768x32 unless otherwise noted.
Workstation Benchmarks Not Included
Workstation benchmark results with SPECviewperf 7.1.1 have been extremely variable on the 925X/915 chipsets. Results are so inconsistent, with up to 50% variation from one board to another using the same configuration, that Workstation benchmarks will be excluded from 925X/915 reviews until we can discover and fix the inconsistency or we can establish a new suite of Workstation benchmarks.Additions to Performance Tests
AutoGK (Auto Gordian Knot) has been selected as the new standard for Encoding benchmarking. This benchmark is partially based on the DVD2AVI engine and we use DivX 5.1.1 as the encoding codec. Test results are complied with a 2-pass encoding using "Sum of All Fear", Chapter 9 as the video source.Game Benchmarks
We have added four new Gaming tests to our standard suite of gaming benchmarks. Far Cry is a popular Direct X 9.0b game, which is run with a custom benchmark called airstrip. We have also added UT2004 with a custom benchmark called UTBench, although we are continuing to run UT2003 standard benchmarks to allow comparison to past tests. Return to Castle Wolfenstein - Enemy Within is a recent OpenGL game based on the Quake engine. We are finding that it is an excellent benchmark for measuring system performance, and it will likely replace Quake3 as our standard OpenGL benchmark down the road. We have also included the Final Fantasy XI benchmark, which is DX9.Other standard game benchmarks include Halo, Microsoft's Direct X 9.0b game; Splinter Cell, a DX9 game; X2 Benchmark, a DX 8.1 game, which includes Transform and Lighting effects; the DX9 Aquamark 3, and Unreal Tournament 2003. The DX 8.1 Comanche 4 benchmark is also used with the 4X anti-aliasing setting a 1280x1024 resolution to differentiate system performance better using the nVidia 6800 Ultra.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
30 Comments
View All Comments
jdoor0 - Tuesday, October 26, 2004 - link
This review has been reviewed:http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=18896
Nige - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link
Does the ASUS P5AD2 Deluxe motherboard have the same overclocking capability as the P5AD2 Premium?skiboysteve - Friday, August 13, 2004 - link
Wow nice catch. i guess my "(I know... toms sucks)" disclaimer came true.yaeh i understand.
Wesley Fink - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link
#26 -There is now an apology to Asus up at THG. They measured the voltage wrong. We had also measured the voltage and found 1.5 to 1.55 which is well within spec, not 2.1 as they reported. They now acknowledge the correct voltage measurement for the P5AD2 is 1.53V.
High Northbridge voltage is not the reason the Asus, or any other 925X/915 board, overclocks well. There are far too many simple and wrong explanations for the complex overclocking issues of the 925X/915 chipsets.
skiboysteve - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link
Page 10"...Broadcom attached to the faster PCI Express bus..."
there is no PCI Express bus, its a point to point protocal.
Just nitpicking.
Great review.
Also, over at Toms (I know... toms sucks) they looked at 9x5 Boards over there and showed that the Asus P5AD2 was running at an astounding 2.1v on the northbridge (1.5v is the stock)
Something might have to be mentioned about reliability of such out of spec behavior, and cooling concerns. You might want to conduct your own quick test on the voltage with a multimeter.
broberts - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link
One of the problems with these arguments is that the FX-53 is almost 20% more expensive.I've been thinking for a while now that benchmarks should show some form of pricing index so that one can better judge the advantage/disadvantage of the various choices. Just quoting prices isn't ideal, for a host of reasons. I'd suggest, instead, a relative measure. And not just the cost of the particular component being benchmarked. Calculate the cost of the each system used in the benchmarks. Pick one, perhaps the lowest or highest cost one and calculate the relative difference in price. I suggest using the entire system because quite often the choice of one component dictates the available choices for other components. Ideally a relative measure for both the components and entire system would be calculated and published.
manno - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link
Moo Moo MOO.manno - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link
why no Doom3?Wesley Fink - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link
#21 -We will definitely be including Doom 3 benches in future reviews. The only reason they are not included in this 925X roundup is because most of the testing was completed before we had a working copy of Doom 3. You can get a clear idea of how the 925X/Intel 560 performs in Doom 3 in Anand's Doom 3: CPU Battlegrounds review published August 4th at http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...
kherman - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link
Umm, Doom 3 benches?