Asus PC-DL Deluxe: 875 with Dual Xeons
by Wesley Fink on September 6, 2003 12:06 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Asus PC-DL: Stress Testing
We performed stress tests on the PC-DL in these areas and configurations:1. Chipset and motherboard stress testing, which was conducted by running the FSB at 144 MHz with 2x512MB double-bank Mushkin PC3500 Level II at the fastest 2-2-2-5 timings.
2. Memory stress testing, which was conducted by running Corsair 3200LL RAM at 333MHz with all 4 DIMM slots filled. Two pairs of Corsair TwinX ver.1.2 was used for this test at the lowest memory timings (2-2-2-5) possible.
Front Side Bus Stress Test Results:
We ran a full range of stress tests and benchmarks to ensure the PC-DL was absolutely stable at each overclocked FSB speed. These stress tests included Prime95 torture tests, which were run in the background for a total of 24 hours. We also ran several other tasks — data compression, various DX8 and DX9 games, and apps like Word and Excel — while Prime95 was running in the background. Finally, we ran our benchmark suite, which includes ZD Winstone suite, Unreal Tournament 2003, SPECviewperf 7.0, and Gun Metal Benchmark 2.The Asus PC-DL was completely stable at the 144 or 3.3GHz setting.
Memory Stress Test Results:
The memory stress test is very simple, as it tests the ability of the Asus PC-DL to operate at its officially supported memory frequency (333MHz DDR) at the lowest supported memory timings our Corsair TwinX LL ver. 1.2 can achieve:| Stable DDR333 Timings (2 Dimms in 1 Dual-Channel Bank) |
|
| Clock Speed: | 333MHz |
| CAS Latency: | 2.0 |
| Bank Interleave: | N/A |
| RAS to CAS Delay: | 2T |
| RAS Precharge: | 5T |
| Precharge Delay: | 2T |
| Command Rate: | N/A |
We had no problems at all running 2 Corsair dimms at the fastest timings available at DDR333. Since the Canterwood chipset was designed for DDR400 operation, it is hardly a surprise that it breezes though DDR333 performance. As new options become available for Dual-Xeon boards it will be interesting to see if DDR400 will present any problem. If Intel intends the 875P to be targeted to any true server markets, there will also have to be the option for much more memory than 4 dimm slots. However, we suspect the 875 will be the workstation, gamer, performance enthusiast, and SOHO server solution.
Filling all 4 available dimm slots with 2 banks of dual-channel memory is more strenuous on the memory subsystem than testing 2 dimms. However, the Asus PC-DL had no trouble running 4 dimms at the fastest DDR333 timings available.
| Stable DDR333 Timings (4 Dimms in 2 Dual-Channel Banks) |
|
| Clock Speed: | 133MHz |
| CAS Latency: | 2.0 |
| Bank Interleave: | N/A |
| RAS to CAS Delay: | 2T |
| RAS Precharge: | 5T |
| Precharge Delay: | 2T |
| Command Rate: | N/A |
We really didn’t expect any problems running our DDR400 memory at the most aggressive DDR333 timings available. Most of the memory currently available in the marketplace will run at fast timings on this DDR333 motherboard.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
29 Comments
View All Comments
Anonymous User - Saturday, September 6, 2003 - link
This review makes, me wonder...is it possible to use two P4 2400/800 CPU's on this board, maybe with some kind of adapter. Those P4's would likely outperform this Xeon setup and possibly also the Opteron, with a very interesting price tag, even if these adaptors would cost $50 each.And if anyone should see an Intel engineer, just tell him we want a 1000 MHZ FSB for those Xeons, as the i875 would surely pass all validation test at this speed, and the PC4000 memory is already available.
Wesley Fink - Saturday, September 6, 2003 - link
The 3200+ Athlon we use for testing AMD IS a Barton core. The 3.0 is the Intel CPU we have been using for benchmarking Intel.Anonymous User - Saturday, September 6, 2003 - link
Why not just make a dual 800FSB P4 system. With HT activated you'd get 4 virtual processors, something that XP Pro can handle.Anonymous User - Saturday, September 6, 2003 - link
i see commens like like its they use thw 3.2Hz p4 but what performance they all expect? 80% from 3.0 to 3.2Ghz?>Lonyo - Saturday, September 6, 2003 - link
"we are reviewing the PC-DL, and comparing it to the performance from the current top Pentium 4, Barton, and Opteron/Athlon64 boards that we have tested"Performance Test Configuration
Processor(s): Intel Dual Xeon 3.06 (1 Mb Cache) 533FSB
AMD Opteron Socket 940 at 2.0GHz (9x222) 444FSB
Intel Pentium 4 at 3.0GHz (800FSB)
No Barton in there, the top Opteron (or so I thought) was the 1.8GHz, and the top P4 is the 3.2 as far as I'm aware.
Anonymous User - Saturday, September 6, 2003 - link
Dual Xeons is a joke. The P4 is starved for bandwidth in a SINGLE processor configuration at 533Mhz FSB. What makes anyone think TWO processors can handle being that starved? It's like eating spaghetti through a straw -- you can get a few noodles, but it's faster to go buy a fork. And, last I heard, Intel wasn't planning on bring a 800Mhz FSB to the Xeon, just a stopgap 667Mhz FSB. Almost any task can be performed better by a single P4 3.0Ghz processor then dual Xeons of any speed on any platform. Xeons make no sense as a consumer platform all. And, with Opteron here, they make no sense as a server platform, either.When can I see my Athlon64 vs. Pentium 4 benchies? I hardly think an overclocked Opteron counts. After all, the 2.0Ghz Athlon64 isn't going to run with dual-channel memory, anyway. Can you say Socket 754? Luckily, AMD is already moving to Socket 940/939 for future releases. Mmm. 64-bit goodness.
Anonymous User - Saturday, September 6, 2003 - link
I'm always dissapointed in dual cpu system reviews, as they never show how the systems multitask. I would like to see the FPS in UT3 while encoding a movie at the same time. Can you play games while burning a DVD? I would like to see the performance while performing multiple tasks at the same time.Anonymous User - Saturday, September 6, 2003 - link
Yea, I'll bet Intel thought they could Spin dual Xeons as a viable filler until Prescott arrives some day. Reality shows there is no way the P4 or dual-Xeons are gonna hold a candle to a single Opteron/A64 let alone a dual system. Intel is hurting as their 90 nano stuff is gonna be too little, too late, and the suckers draw a pile of current = a ton of heat. Who wants that in a system thats' too expensive and that under performs??? They should just scrap the Prescott and work on something worth releasing to the market before it's obsolete.Anonymous User - Saturday, September 6, 2003 - link
Somehow this review looks eerily familiar. Hrm, wonder why :P.