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
Wesley Fink - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
#22 & #23 - This will all make more sense when Derek's companion piece is posted later today, which compares the 3.6, 3.4EE, and AMD chipsets.There is no 3.6EE, and we considered comparing the 3.4EE, but the early benches showed the 3.6 to be a fairer comparison. The 3.6 is the only new Intel chip and the top (3.4EE is just a new 775 package launch) and the FX53 is the top AMD chip. The FX53 runs at the same speed as the 3800+ (2.4GHz) but has twice the cache, and both are Dual-Channel Socket 939. The FX55 will not be released until late this year.
Comparing last year's 3200+, the first Socket 754 Athlon 64 and single-channel, to the just-released 560 (3.6GHz) compares nothing.
Bozo Galora - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
If the chipset supports only one IDE channel, why does the Gigabyte board have two green IDE sockets.Am I missing something?
I really wanna know, because only one IDE means I dont buy this stuff.
shabby - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
So when are the dual core cpu's coming out? Think ill wait for those.SDA - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
That's just it, though, the FX-53 is just a few tens of dollars more than the 3800+, so some people figure why not? AMD is overcharging because they know they can get away with it..stephenbrooks - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
Maybe replace '3500+' by '3800+' above.stephenbrooks - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
One interesting thing is the difference it makes which AMD chip people compare the 3.6E to in these reviews. Before coming here I read the one at http://www.bit-tech.net/review/326/ and came away thoroughly impressed. The clincher was that they compared to the A64 3200+ whereas this review compared to the FX-53.I'm not totally sure if the 3.6E _should_ be compared to the FX-53, being as it is marketed as a '560', in the 5xx 'mid-range' desktop segment for Intel. A better comparison for the high-price-end might be 3.4/3.46EE vs. FX-53 or '720' vs. FX-55 later on.
I'd think 3.6E vs. A64 3700+, or even better the 3500+ (as it's on AMD's new socket too) would be an informative comparison. It's just a shame Intel's high-end offerings are a bit thin on the ground right now.
Staples - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
Good review. I wish you had compared the 875 with the 925x however both using a Presscott CPU. With one using a Northwood and one using a Presscott fails to show which chipset optimizes the power of the CPU. The fact that you didn't further inphasises that Intel is in one hellava drought. The 3.2 Northwood/875 combo that came out like 8+ months ago is still faster than ANYTHING they have released.I am waiting for a reason to upgrade but this sure isn't something I was looking for. With Intel having these troubles, AMD is going to take their sweet time putting out anything faster.
Pumpkinierre - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
It would be great to see the 915 with Skt478- best of both worlds. I know that Skt775 is appearing on 865 mobos (Abit AS8). At that last Taiwan computer expo they had dual intel Sckt mobos but were they 915s?rjm55 - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
#16 - I disagree with you. I think Northwood on 875 is exactly the right comparison to Prescott 775 on 925X. Both at the same speed as done in the review. Prescott was not designed for 875, so comparing the best last generation 875/Northwood to the new 925X/Prescott is extremely fair. I'm sure Intel would have preferred a comparison of Prescott to Prescott, because they would have looked better. I think that was #4's point, which you apparently missed.Doormat - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
Now I dont feel so bad about buying that P4-3.0C/i875 combo last month...