DFI CFX3200-DR: ATI RD580 Tweak Attack
by Wesley Fink on May 8, 2006 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Overclocking
| DFI CFX3200-DR Overclocking Testbed |
|
| Processor: | Athlon64 4000+ (2.4GHz, 1MB Cache) |
| CPU Voltage: | 1.425V (default 1.35V) |
| Cooling: | Thermaltake Silent Boost K8 Heatsink/Fan |
| Power Supply: | OCZ Power Stream 520W |
| Memory: | OCZ PC4800* Platinum (Samsung TCCD Memory Chips) *The current equivalent OCZ memory to OCZ PC3200 Platinum Rev. 2 |
| Hard Drive | Hitachi 250GB 7200RPM SATA2 8MB Cache |
| Maximum OC: (Standard Ratio) |
246x12 (5x HT, 2.5-3-3-7) 2952MHz, 2 DIMMs in DC mode (+23% CPU Overclock) |
| Maximum FSB: (Lower Ratio) |
315 x 9 (4x HT, 1T, 2.5-3-4-7) 2835MHz, 2 DIMMs in DC mode (+58% Bus Overclock) |
In most cases current NVIDIA and ATI chipsets need to have Hyper Transport frequency adjusted to 3X around a 300 Clock frequency to keep HT speed around 1000. The RD580 chipset was designed for higher HT speed. We consistently found the DFI board, like the recently tested ASUS A8R32-MVP based on the same RD580 chipset, could easily handle HT speeds in the 1450 to 1550 range. For most overclocking that means that it is not necessary to even adjust the 5X HT setting. It was only where we were exceeding around 1500 (300 Clock Frequency) that we had to drop the HT one notch to 4X. Overclockers should be very happy with this feature of the RD580 chipset.
It was previously reported that the RD580 chipset will not reset an HTT strap or ratio unless you first power down. We had first seen this in other testing of the RD580 Reference board and it was also the case in our review of the ASUS A8R32-MVP. For instance, if you try to set the ratio to 4X (from 5X), the board will not implement the ratio change until you have powered down the system. Engineers at DFI have found a clever way around this issue. They implement a power down and restart as part of the normal reboot sequence. This is very similar to the method used by ASUS and others in getting around the overclock locks on the 925x chipset. We mention this because at first it appeared the board was a very slow booter compared to similar boards. In fact the extra time is for a complete power down and start so BIOS options are properly implemented on boot. The delay might be annoying for frequent reboots, but most enthusiasts spend time getting their systems properly configured and then seldom shut down/reboot. An extra 5-10 second delay before hours of computer use isn't something we're concerned about.
The DFI CFX3200-DR required a few special adjustments for overclocks of 300 and beyond. Under "Genie BIOS Setting", "DRAM Configuration" "Max Asynch Latency" should be set to 4.5 to 6 for high overclocks. "Read Preamble Time", just below this setting, should be set to 7 to 10. The Auto setting for both options is too fast on early BIOS revisions, but Auto actually sets these more reasonable figures beginning with the 417 BIOS.
While we did not achieve the highest overclocks ever with the DFI CFX3200-DR, we suspect we could have achieved anything with this board if we had the weeks to invest in testing and tweaking the huge array of adjustments that are available. We were frankly overwhelmed by the array of adjustments as already mentioned in the Features discussion. It is wonderful to have such fine levels of control if you need and want it, but it is quite another to be forced to master these control levels to achieve maximum overclocks on this board.
The DFI BIOS really needs auto settings that work for the majority of situations with finer levels of control available if you want them. In many areas "Auto" is fine on the CFX3200-DR, but in other areas Auto is too aggressive or too related to a specific memory or CPU. It will likely take a few more BIOS revisions before the DFI will be a good board for both the budding overclocker and the veteran computer enthusiast. Overclocking has been part of computers for most of the AT staff since the Celeron 300 days or even earlier. However, the DFI adjustments are more than we will ever use and far too difficult to test and master. After complaining loudly for more OC options on boards, we're a little embarrassed to say this board is too much, but we think it will bring most users, even well-informed users, to psychotic episodes with 32 levels of drive strength, and DQS skew levels of +/- 0 to 255 in 511 levels.
Something for DFI to consider is the mechanism used by Gigabyte. Gigabyte has hidden their advanced BIOS options under special menus that only become visible by pressing Ctrl+F1. While we're not huge fans of that mechanism for normal BIOS adjustments - like basic memory timings - there are definitely options on the CFX3200-DR that could be hidden. It would be nice to get a "regular" BIOS that has adjustments similar to DFI's Infinity line available, and then an "advanced" mode could be used to display the additional options. Our only comment is that the "advanced" mode should be clearly documented within the BIOS, as many people newer to computers are unaware of the Ctrl+F1 feature of Gigabyte boards.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
25 Comments
View All Comments
Stele - Wednesday, May 10, 2006 - link
IMHO the main disadvantage of using the Sil3114 instead of a newer SATA controller like the 3132 is not so much the 1.5Gbps transfer rate, but the fact that it's PCI-based and hence badly bottlenecked once you fill all four channels. 1.5Gbps is a theoretical maximum and HDDs today are nowhere near that limit - in fact we left ATA-133 without even breaking the ATA-100 limit. Since each SATA HDD gets a dedicated 1.5Gbps channel, arrays won't saturate the SATA interface either - rather, they would saturate the slow PCI interface as previously mentioned. Furthermore, the other significant feature of SATA II - NCQ - is of virtually zero relevance to most users, unless one is using the board in a corporate server; not impossible, but not likely either. Therefore, to harp on a figure that has generally been more a marketing tool (as was ATA-133) than a real necessity says little of the real issues at hand.In return, using the Sil3114 means using a tried and tested product whose characteristics are very well known by now. Board engineers would know how best to design around it - what special requirements (signal integrity, trace lengths, coupling etc), if any, need to be factored in, how the controller performs and behaves and so on. Furthermore, the 3114 provides 4 SATA ports for maximum expansion capability - there is no 4-port version of the 3132 as you alluded to in the review - not yet anyway. You may well be right about having a truckload of 3114s to get rid off, so that's likely a factor too. Perhaps when the 3132 gains a 4-port counterpart (and DFI finishes off 3114 inventory) then we may see newer stuff to come. :)
On another side note, yes there would probably be many people who would appreciate the insane options in BIOS, but I do agree that they should make the UI more user-friendly, e.g. by having Automatic as a choice and/or by placing advanced options in sub-menus to distinguish them from the main options. That would satisfy enthusiasts of all levels, from the mad hatters down to the ones who are just starting out. :)
Generally a review well done! :)
Stele - Wednesday, May 10, 2006 - link
Perhaps that statement should be clarified/qualified a little - there is no 4-port version of the 3132 (i.e. PCIe + SATA II + 3.0Gbps) in a single controller IC. The 3132 supports, and hence is expected to be used with, SATA port multipliers - primarily the SII 3726, which can support up to 5 drives. In future, DFI could use a 3132 with one SATA channel routed to an external connector (as in the Asus A8N32-SLI) while the other channel could be connected to a 3726 to provide an additional 4 or even 5 internal HDD channels.
However, this would create two problems - the need for another IC (the board is already very cramped as it is!) and, as already discussed, the need to gain sufficient experience with the new ICs in the lab before they can be confidently implemented and designed around. Cost and time-to-market factors may also have played a role in DFI's choice.
proamerica - Monday, May 8, 2006 - link
This is a poor quality review. The reviewer complains too much about variables that actually improve performance when handled by the right person. The overclocking potential of this board is beyond all other 939 boards I have owned, including the A8R32-MVP... People all over the place are reporting the highest overclocks ever achieved for memory and CPUs. You have to know what you are doing I'm afraid, and yes it requires using all the settings in the BIOS. That is the caveat of buying this board, its hard to use, and it takes time to figure it out, but once you do its worth it. I stably OC'ed my X2 3800 to 2940Mhz, and I currently run it 24/7 at 2700Mhz. Is 2940Mhz the highest OC I have ever gotten with this processor? Yes, stably, by far the highest. One of the greatest aspects of this board is that it will overclock really high but it doesn't take a lot of voltage to get things stable.Why does the review say: "but this DFI does make us wonder how many end users will actually devote the time to master 32 levels of drive strength, and DQS skew levels of +/- 0 to 255 in 511 levels." Lets see, an extremely expensive motherboard from a company known for making the most tweakable boards around... And you wonder if end-users are going to bother? Yeah they're going to bother. If they don't, they should have purchased something else.
Bottom line, this board beats the A8R32-MVP hands down, its just harder to use than the Asus.
Wesley Fink - Tuesday, May 9, 2006 - link
The review pointed out what you clearly found. It's a difficult board to master, but the options and performance can be outstanding. Some want to take the time to master it, others would prefer a board that is easier to overclock. The real poiunt is the DFI CFX3200 still needs work. The BIOS does NOT need to be so difficult to master, and it wouldn't be if more intelligent choices were made for auto settings.The CFX3200 is not a bad board, it is just a very difficult board to use and master - even for an experienced enthusiast.
Zoomer - Wednesday, May 10, 2006 - link
As mentioned by someone else, the auto (default) settings are nicely choosen - for BH5 memory.Perhaps it would be wise to point that out somewhere, or provide an option of memory: BH5/Normal/Valueram/Manual
ozzimark - Monday, May 8, 2006 - link
"Running four double-sided 512MB or 1GB DIMMs is much more demanding than running two DS DIMMs, and like almost every board we have tested the Command Rate needed to drop to 2T with 4 DS DIMMs."using a high dram drive strength should allow for stable opteration at 1T with 4 double rank sticks in.. :)
bigtoe36 - Monday, May 8, 2006 - link
From the Tweak guide on the bleedinedge forum."Max async latency - options 7 thru 10 are all you should need, 7 for agressive tight timings 10 for high fsb overclocks. This option HAS TO BE SET MANUALLY
Read Preamble - 4.5 thru 6 is all you need worry about, 4.5 for BH5 etc and 6 for high fsb overclocks. i usually use 5.5 and 6. Again HAS TO BE SET MANUALLY"
http://www.bleedinedge.com/forum/showthread.php?t=...">http://www.bleedinedge.com/forum/showthread.php?t=... for the full guide.
Wesley you have the options posted on page 4 the wrong way round, its easy to do as I often get them confused.
Tony
ozzimark - Monday, May 8, 2006 - link
with dfi boards, it's long been my experience that manually setting MAL/RP is a VERY BAD thing.bigtoe36 - Monday, May 8, 2006 - link
Normally that would be the case but DFI were setting 4.5 and 5 as hidden defaults. Now if you are running Bh5 you will have no problems, but most everything else would have issues.Thats why i quoted in my guide and on MANY forums you have to set these manually to get the best from the board.
mbhame - Monday, May 8, 2006 - link
Where's the USB/Firewire CPU Utilization and I/O? Where's IDE performance?Throughput is not indicative of real-world performance for any user I know.