CrossFire Xpress 3200: RD580 for AM2
by Wesley Fink on June 1, 2006 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Overclocking
The initial reference BIOS supplied by ATI was plagued with several issues that limited overclocking. Since RD580 is known to be an excellent overclocker, ATI looked into the issues and supplied a new 5/30/2006 BIOS which corrected the timing issues that had limited overclocking in the first BIOS.
With the Build 15 BIOS, the ATI CrossFire Xpress 3200 AM2 is an outstanding overclocker - the best we have seen at both stock and reduced multiplier overclocking. We made no attempt to maintain memory speed, but instead selected memory ratios that would allow the Corsair test memory to run at the optimal 3-3-3 timings at around DDR2-800. With the DDR2 memory controller on the processor with the AMD AM2, ratios should not really carry performance penalties as they do on chipset based memory controllers.
No attempt was made to run at x8 or x7 multipliers, which theoretically could yield 380x8 or 400 (highest bus speed option) x7 if the processor speed could be maintained. ATI was absolutely correct in their assessment of our early BIOS bug issues. Overclocking with the updated Build 15 BIOS was effortless, with almost no special OC skills required. Most settings were left on auto, except for a slight boost in HTT voltage and a drop to 4X HT. 5x HTT reached to just over 1500 HTT (302) before requiring a drop to 4x. In all cases base memory speed was reduced to a setting that would yield somewhere around DDR2-800 at OC and timings were left at 3-3-3-13 at 2.147v. We did not even need to boost processor voltage until we reached just over 3.0GHz. The AM2 CPU handled the 3.0 GHz speed at stock voltage. These overclocking results are superb.
Power Usage
It has been reported that the ATI RD580 chipset consumes up to 40 watts less power than the feature-comparable nForce590. We attempted to verify these results with our standard Model P4400 Kill-a-watt meter. The Kill-a-watt plugs into the wall and measures wattage of the entire system. We compared near identically configured Foxconn NVIDIA 590 and ATI CrossFire Xpress 3200 AM2 systems at idle and under stress.
While the ATI system used less power at idle and when stressed, we could not match the 40W difference some others have reported. We did find the ATI system a bit more power efficient running the NVIDIA 7900GTX or the ATI X1900 XT. Even full CrossFire X1900 XT consumed less power in the ATI AM2 board than NVIDIA SLI 7900GTX required in the NVIDIA 590 board.
Power consumption goes up dramatically during overclocking. At the standard 12X multiplier and 255 clock speed (3.06GHz), running X1900 XT Crossfire, power consumption measured over 500 Watts during load conditions. Whether SLI or Crossfire, ATI or NVIDIA, please keep in mind that two top video cards and overclocking require tremendous amounts of power for stable operation.
| ATI CrossFire Xpress 3200 AM2 Overclocking Testbed |
|
| Processor: | AM2 X2 4800+ (2.4GHz, 1MB Cache per core) |
| CPU Voltage: | 1.4V (default 1.3V) |
| Cooling: | AMD Stock Heatpipe FX62 Cooler |
| Power Supply: | OCZ Power Stream 520W |
| Memory: | Corsair Twin2x2048-PC2-8500C5 (2x1GB) (Micron Memory Chips) 2 DIMMs in dual-channel mode |
| Hard Drive: | Hitachi 250GB 7200RPM SATA2 8MB Cache |
| Maximum OC: (Standard Ratio) |
255x12 (5x HT, 3-3-3-13) 3060MHz (+28% CPU Overclock) |
| Maximum FSB: (Lower Ratio) |
338 x 9 (4x HT, 3-3-3-13) 3042MHz (+69% Bus Overclock) |
The initial reference BIOS supplied by ATI was plagued with several issues that limited overclocking. Since RD580 is known to be an excellent overclocker, ATI looked into the issues and supplied a new 5/30/2006 BIOS which corrected the timing issues that had limited overclocking in the first BIOS.
With the Build 15 BIOS, the ATI CrossFire Xpress 3200 AM2 is an outstanding overclocker - the best we have seen at both stock and reduced multiplier overclocking. We made no attempt to maintain memory speed, but instead selected memory ratios that would allow the Corsair test memory to run at the optimal 3-3-3 timings at around DDR2-800. With the DDR2 memory controller on the processor with the AMD AM2, ratios should not really carry performance penalties as they do on chipset based memory controllers.
No attempt was made to run at x8 or x7 multipliers, which theoretically could yield 380x8 or 400 (highest bus speed option) x7 if the processor speed could be maintained. ATI was absolutely correct in their assessment of our early BIOS bug issues. Overclocking with the updated Build 15 BIOS was effortless, with almost no special OC skills required. Most settings were left on auto, except for a slight boost in HTT voltage and a drop to 4X HT. 5x HTT reached to just over 1500 HTT (302) before requiring a drop to 4x. In all cases base memory speed was reduced to a setting that would yield somewhere around DDR2-800 at OC and timings were left at 3-3-3-13 at 2.147v. We did not even need to boost processor voltage until we reached just over 3.0GHz. The AM2 CPU handled the 3.0 GHz speed at stock voltage. These overclocking results are superb.
Power Usage
It has been reported that the ATI RD580 chipset consumes up to 40 watts less power than the feature-comparable nForce590. We attempted to verify these results with our standard Model P4400 Kill-a-watt meter. The Kill-a-watt plugs into the wall and measures wattage of the entire system. We compared near identically configured Foxconn NVIDIA 590 and ATI CrossFire Xpress 3200 AM2 systems at idle and under stress.
While the ATI system used less power at idle and when stressed, we could not match the 40W difference some others have reported. We did find the ATI system a bit more power efficient running the NVIDIA 7900GTX or the ATI X1900 XT. Even full CrossFire X1900 XT consumed less power in the ATI AM2 board than NVIDIA SLI 7900GTX required in the NVIDIA 590 board.
Power consumption goes up dramatically during overclocking. At the standard 12X multiplier and 255 clock speed (3.06GHz), running X1900 XT Crossfire, power consumption measured over 500 Watts during load conditions. Whether SLI or Crossfire, ATI or NVIDIA, please keep in mind that two top video cards and overclocking require tremendous amounts of power for stable operation.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
71 Comments
View All Comments
Stele - Friday, June 2, 2006 - link
Odd that the board uses two 3132s to provide the extra 4 ports - probably for logistic and pricing reasons (easier to stock and better economy of scale when buying 2x one chip compared to 2 different chips).I say it's 'odd' because the 3132 was specifically designed to work with port multipliers, specifically their SiI 3726 1-to-5 drive multiplier. The 3132 thus has only 2 ports to save space and costs (for customers who only need 2, e.g. laptops). In this motherboard's case, instead of having two 3132s giving 4 ports, you could use one 3132 and one 3726 to provide (1 + 5 =) 6 extra SATA ports via the 3132, bringing the total number of SATA ports on the motherboard to 10.
Indeed, this would probably be a useful combination: 4 from the SB600, 4/5 from the 3726 and the remaining 1/2 routed to the back as eSATA. For routing simplicity, I suspect board designers may keep all the ports from the 3726 in one cluster near the IC and hence as internal SATA, leaving the 3132's other channel available for eSATA.
While we're on the SATA question, I'd like to ask if anyone has any confirmation about the RAID levels supported by the SB600. This is because on pg 2 of the AT review, it mentions in the diagram that SB600 supports, inter alia, RAID 5. However, on pg 3, the table does not list RAID 5 among the supported RAID levels.
I then went to ATi's website to check out their own pages on the SB600. Interestingly enough, there was the same problem - the diagram was also there, showing RAID 5, but their own spec sheet does not mention RAID 5 either! So does the SB600 support RAID 5 or doesn't it? :P
Chadder007 - Thursday, June 1, 2006 - link
I wish ATI and NVidia would get off of this Dual Card setup crap and get their act together and make a Single Dual Core video card, in the way Dual Core Processors are being made now.Trisped - Thursday, June 1, 2006 - link
That would be nice, but the power drain and heat dissipation problems would be un real. Then people would still want a dual card solution. I can see it now, you need a 1K power supply for your video cards and one for the rest of your system. Your video cards take up 6 slots and have fans that sound like a 1960s sports car. Your CPU has 4 cores and everything is over clocked 25-50%.JarredWalton - Thursday, June 1, 2006 - link
There have actually been several dual GPU cards released in the past, although all of them still require SLI motherboards in order to function. (The SLI requirement is due to NVIDIA's drivers requiring an SLI chipset in order to function.) As far as making dual core GPU -- like the Pentium D, Athlon X2, Core Duo, etc. -- there's actually no point in doing so. Graphics functions are essentially infinitely parallel, so rather than making a dual core G70, they could just make a 48/16/32 (pixel pipelines/vertex pipelines/ROPs) chip instead. Of course, that would require something like 600 million transistors, so until we start getting GPUs made on 65 nm aren't likely to see such a design (or anything close to it).peternelson - Thursday, June 1, 2006 - link
On MAJOR difference not covered is in useable PCIE lanes.
The review talks about
x16 graphics
x16 graphics
no useable pci remain on the reference board
1x pcie
1x pcie
whereas the nvidia 590 solution offers much more including pcix4.
This is important for people who want to stick in extra raid controllers or specialist cards.
It would be good to highlight this shortcoming and whether it is purely down to the reference motherboard design or to the chipset not supporting as many lanes as the 590.
Also you mention that nvidia are working on putting both x16 in some future northbride (which will be nice). Can you give any hints as to timing, naming, or if this will be dubbed "nforce 6"
Wesley Fink - Thursday, June 1, 2006 - link
We are expecting a bit more information and we will then add this to our comparison chart.ATI RD580 AM2 has 40 PCIe Lanes - 32 for 2 x16 slots, 4 for interconnect between North and South bridge and 4 available for x1 x2, x4 slot(s). In addition the SB600 supports 6 PCI slots.
nVidia has 46 PCIe lanes available with 9 links.
psychobriggsy - Thursday, June 1, 2006 - link
This review says there is GigE in SB600, with a PCIe attached PHY.It also says that nVidia's dual GigE is via PCIe attached PHYs. PHYs do not connect via PCIe, they connect to a GigE controller (whereever it is located).
In the case of nVidia, the southbridge has two GigE controllers integrated. In the case of SB600, there is no GigE controller, you attach it via PCIe x1, allowing you to use decent controllers, or crappy realtek controllers (making motherboard purchases have another thing to check).
Stele - Friday, June 2, 2006 - link
That's probably what ATi's thinking. There are pros and cons to both nVidia's ondie MAC and SB5600's lack of ondie MAC. By having no controller on the SB600, the chip cost is reduced while motherboard manufacturers have complete freedom to choose whichever controller they would like to include - Marvell, Realtek, etc. and single- or dual-port.
The only downside is that you'd need extra real-estate on the motherboard, though arguably it's not that big a deal, especially if controllers with built-in MAC and PHY are used. After all, for dual-port networking capabilities that has server-like features like teaming and fail-over, manufacturers can just use such products as the very attractive Marvell 88E8062 PCIe x4 dual-port GbE controller - which some motherboards like the Asus P5WDG2-WS already do.
Indeed, I'm hoping (dreaming?) that at least one of the top motherboard brands would use this controller in their RD580 solutions, but the fact that the controller is likely going to be quite expensive, along with the perceived lack of the need for such a high-end component would probably kill that idea.
Wesley Fink - Thursday, June 1, 2006 - link
BOTH the ATI and nForce 590 use PHYs that connect to the chip and communicate over a PCIe lane. We were merely differentiating that the Gigabit LAN in both cases communicated over PCIe and was not connected to PCI. nVidia has 2 Gigabit PHY connections, while ATI has 1 Gigabit PHY connection.peternelson - Thursday, June 1, 2006 - link
He's right, the PHY (external or internal) connects to the MAC, which is subsequently connected to the pcie lanes. No pcie goes to any Gbe PHY.