Intel 925X/915: Chipset Performance & DDR2
by Wesley Fink on June 19, 2004 3:01 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Intel 925X Express
The Intel D925XCV is the Enthusiast version flagship for all the new Intel technology.
That is not to say Enthusiasts will stand in line to buy the new Intel board, since Intel has not traditionally supported the kinds of features and adjustments that will sway enthusiasts to buy a high-end Intel motherboard. The top Intel motherboard is always, however, a top-performing motherboard at default speeds, and it becomes the chipset performance standard. It is also the standard-bearer for Intel chipset features.
Click to enlarge.
If you look carefully, you will see that the power connectors on the new motherboards, both 925X and 915, are 24-pin, and not the common 20-pin ATX connectors on current Pentium 4 power supplies. We found that server grade power supplies providing 24-pin connectors work fine on the new boards. However, if you have a new top-line PCIe graphics card you will likely find a new 6-pin power connector on the graphics card. You will need either a new power supply with the 6-pin graphics connector or a converter cable that allows two 4-pin molex to be combined in a 6-pin connector to power the new high-end PCIe cards. This is true of both 925X and 915 boards.
925X only supports DDR2 and PCI Express 16X graphics. 925X is also the only 775 chipset version that is stated to support ECC memory. We were not able to verify ECC support, since we did not have access to DDR2 ECC memory. The other features are related to the ICH6 version used with 925X, though you will more likely see ICH6R and ICH6RW (pictured here) paired with 925X.
The other distinguishing feature of Intel 925X is accelerated performance modes compared to 915 chipsets. Intel first differentiated their "Enthusiast" board with enhanced performance on the 875 chipset. The 875 chipset featured PAT, or Performance Acceleration Technology, which was supposed to be a unique feature of the 875 chipset. Chipset manufacturers began revising 865 boards to support PAT-like performance almost as soon as Intel launched 865/875. This was not a development that pleased Intel.
This time around, Intel is also differentiating their top chipset with enhanced performance. Intel did not share any catchy names like PAT, and the diagram above is the only information that they provided on how they make the 925X faster. When we asked for more information than the almost meaningless diagram above, Intel said their acceleration methods were "proprietary". This is not really a surprise after the PAT confusion with 875/865. Industry sources tell us that the new acceleration scheme used on 925X is much more complicated than PAT; it will not likely appear on 915 chipset solutions from other manufacturers.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
57 Comments
View All Comments
gsellis - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
I am with #4 and #16, it is OK to leave the Northwood, but this is not apples to apples if you did not use two Prescotts to compare the boards to get a percentage difference in the architecture. The 'weak' areas almost match up to a Prescott vs Northwood comparison. It does not tell anything. Sorry Wesley, but the conclusion is flawed on a direct comparison.Bozo Galora - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
and notice the alderwood gigabyte only has the single red intel IDE, no greenieshttp://www.tomshardware.com/motherboard/20040619/i...
Bozo Galora - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
Tom's says new Intel chipsets are O/C locked - tied to PLLhttp://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20040619_1103...
Kahless - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
Am i missing something or is intel not as familiar with there own products as ATI...ie just read about ATI's chipset optimized for prescott and its faster than northwood which is a change from most benchmark comparisons on other boards ...http://www.anandtech.com/chipsets/showdoc.html?i=2...
ZobarStyl - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
Combined with the fact that they gonna start putting all this new tech on BTX format, Intel is really trying hard to completely remove itself from the DIY market. And although your average computer buyer doesn't even know what an AMD processor is, you can bet that OEM's are too happy about being asked to either a) swallow the cost of these upgrades or b) raise prices and lose customers, and this might make them eye AMD as a way to shore up the bottom line. Being a trendsetter is one thing but bringing in DDRII when it's slower and PCI-E when it offers practically no benefit isn't exactly blazing a trail that I want to follow...JustAnAverageGuy - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
"AMD is too pricey and Intel performance is pathetic"I can honestly say that is the FIRST time I have ever read that phrase.
Falloutboy525 - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
from what i've read on ddr2 it won't start make a big performance difference unless its clocked almost twice the speed as the ddr1 your compairing it to due to the fact all ddr2 is is 2 ddr1 chips dual channeld run thru a buffer. so when your running at 400mhz ddr2 the latency is the same as ddr200 due to the speed the chips are running at not the external frequency.Marlin1975 - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
"AMD is too pricey"WTF?
You can get a Athlon64 chip for less then $199 now and there is a sempron 3100+ socket 754 chip that has a MSRP of only $124
AMD hsa the best bang for the buck if you want low/mid end (atlon XP) or even mid/high end (Athlon 64/fx)
I went from a 800Mhz FSB HT P4 to a Athlon64 and and glad I did.
Zebo - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
"AMD is too pricey and Intel performance is pathetic"I agree socket 939 is way overpriced, especially for the underdog AMD who has an opporunity to make real enroads into the market with Intel down right now... but the rest of this is untrue. Socket 754 3200+ is the same price and P4 3.2 and they split the benchmarks. I'd argue for gamers the A64 3200+ is underpriced. Then intels performance is just fine unless you call 5-10% differences here and there signifigant. I don't and i doubt you'd even notice without charts to prove it.
tfranzese - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
"AMD performs great till you give it too much to do at once, and they won't fix that till they bring in dual core."Every processor is like this, Hyper-Threading doesn't save any Intel chip from this same thing. Benchmarks like Winstone, etc are benchmarking with multitasking in mind.
"AMD is too pricey and Intel performance is pathetic"
lol, it's ironic, but I'm glad AMD is where they are. They certainly aren't the same company there were 8 years ago.