ASUS M2N32-SLI & Epox MF570SLI: AM2 Wunderkinder
by Wesley Fink on June 28, 2006 5:10 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Overclocking
Any board that reaches a 300 clock speed or beyond must be considered an excellent overclocker. The Epox reached 318 clock speed with a 9x multiplier and 250 at the stock 12x multiplier. The 570 is a simpler design than the 590 and it should be as good at overclocking, or better than, the 590. There is no logical reason both 570 boards we have tested top out around 315.
Both platforms use the most up-to-date 590 MCP, with a few items disabled or unimplemented in the 570 version. We are left to wonder if perhaps the maximum overclock of the 570 is being artificially limited so as to make the 590 more attractive? We have no hard evidence of this thought; we are just trying to understand why a simpler solution - which normally overclocks better - does worse with the MSI and EPoX 570 SLI boards.
Memory Stress Testing
Optimum tRAS
The Epox MF570SLI behaved like the Foxconn and ATI in tRAS memory testing. As a result all testing was performed at 3-3-3-13 timings. This provided the greatest bandwidth and the best stability.
Memory Stress Testing
The Epox board does not offer the fine granularity of memory voltage controls that the ASUS board provides, as you can only increase voltage in 0.1V increments. We would prefer at the very least 0.05 V increments, and even better are the 0.025V increments that ASUS, Foxconn and others offer.
With two DIMMs installed, testing was completely stable at 3-3-3-8 2T timings at DDR2-800. Even with further tuning, we were not able to run at 1T command rate at DDR2-800. The highest speed that could run at 1T was DDR2-667. As already stated in the ASUS memory testing, the AM2 does not officially support 2T Command Rate at DDR2-800, so it should come as no surprise that the Epox could not handle the 1T settings. The Gigabyte and ASUS are the only AM2 boards tested thus far that can run at DDR2800 2T, but extensive testing showed no advantage at all in real-world performance using the DDR2-800 1T timings.
Installing four DIMMs stresses the memory subsystem further. We had to drop the timings slightly to a 4 RAS-to-CAS setting at 2.3V to achieve stable performance with 4 DIMMs. In real-world testing this is practically the same as the fastest 3-3-3 timings we achieved on the fast ASUS M2N32-SLI Deluxe.
| Epox MF570SLI Overclocking Testbed |
|
| Processor: | AM2 4800+ (x2, 2.4GHz, 1MB Cache per core) |
| CPU Voltage: | 1.5V (default 1.4V) |
| Cooling: | AMD Stock Heatpipe FX62 Cooler |
| Power Supply: | OCZ Power Stream 520W |
| Memory: | Corsair Twin2x2048-PC2-8500C5 (2x1GB) (Micron Memory Chips) |
| Hard Drive | Hitachi 250GB 7200RPM SATA2 16MB Cache |
| Maximum OC: (Standard Ratio) |
250x12 (5x HT, 3-3-3-13) 3000MHz (+25%) |
| Maximum FSB: (Lower Ratio) |
318 x 9 (4x HT, 3-3-3-13) (2862MHz, 2 DIMMs in DC mode) (+59% Bus Overclock) |
Any board that reaches a 300 clock speed or beyond must be considered an excellent overclocker. The Epox reached 318 clock speed with a 9x multiplier and 250 at the stock 12x multiplier. The 570 is a simpler design than the 590 and it should be as good at overclocking, or better than, the 590. There is no logical reason both 570 boards we have tested top out around 315.
Both platforms use the most up-to-date 590 MCP, with a few items disabled or unimplemented in the 570 version. We are left to wonder if perhaps the maximum overclock of the 570 is being artificially limited so as to make the 590 more attractive? We have no hard evidence of this thought; we are just trying to understand why a simpler solution - which normally overclocks better - does worse with the MSI and EPoX 570 SLI boards.
Memory Stress Testing
Optimum tRAS
The Epox MF570SLI behaved like the Foxconn and ATI in tRAS memory testing. As a result all testing was performed at 3-3-3-13 timings. This provided the greatest bandwidth and the best stability.
Memory Stress Testing
The Epox board does not offer the fine granularity of memory voltage controls that the ASUS board provides, as you can only increase voltage in 0.1V increments. We would prefer at the very least 0.05 V increments, and even better are the 0.025V increments that ASUS, Foxconn and others offer.
| Epox MF570SLI DDR2-800 Timings - 2 DIMMs (2/4 slots populated - 1 Dual-Channel Bank) |
|
| Clock Speed: | 200MHz |
| Timing Mode: | 800MHz - Default |
| CAS Latency: | 3 |
| RAS to CAS Delay: | 3 |
| RAS Precharge: | 3 |
| RAS Cycle Time: | 8 |
| Command Rate: | 2T |
| Voltage: | 2.2V |
With two DIMMs installed, testing was completely stable at 3-3-3-8 2T timings at DDR2-800. Even with further tuning, we were not able to run at 1T command rate at DDR2-800. The highest speed that could run at 1T was DDR2-667. As already stated in the ASUS memory testing, the AM2 does not officially support 2T Command Rate at DDR2-800, so it should come as no surprise that the Epox could not handle the 1T settings. The Gigabyte and ASUS are the only AM2 boards tested thus far that can run at DDR2800 2T, but extensive testing showed no advantage at all in real-world performance using the DDR2-800 1T timings.
| Epox MF570SLI DDR2-800 Timings - 4 DIMMs (4/4 slots populated - 2 Dual-Channel Banks) |
|
| Clock Speed: | 200MHz |
| Timing Mode: | 800MHz - Default |
| CAS Latency: | 3 |
| RAS to CAS Delay: | 4 |
| RAS Precharge: | 3 |
| RAS Cycle Time: | 13 |
| Command Rate: | 2T |
| Voltage: | 2.3V |
Installing four DIMMs stresses the memory subsystem further. We had to drop the timings slightly to a 4 RAS-to-CAS setting at 2.3V to achieve stable performance with 4 DIMMs. In real-world testing this is practically the same as the fastest 3-3-3 timings we achieved on the fast ASUS M2N32-SLI Deluxe.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
23 Comments
View All Comments
Missing Ghost - Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - link
yep the choice of I/O ports on the back panel is pretty poorLarso - Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - link
Perhaps someone should clarify this for me. I have been noticing how there is a growing interest in how the motherboard makers have done the power conversion for the CPU. Why has this become an issue to investigate?I don't think there was a similar focus on the power converters for the netburst chips, which I believe soaked a lot more juice than these AMD chips. I believe they managed to deliver stable power to the netbursts without needing an 8 phase converter cooled by heatpipes??
I'm fearing that the motherboard producers will start to create extravagant and foolishly designed converters to please the reviewers. I believe there is no good reason to go for an 8 phase design, when a 4 phase would do the job, considering the money that can be spend on each phase. And that ASUS need to cool the converter by heatpipe seems to indicate that the convertion have a bad effeciency, is this really a step forward?
I really enjoy reading more about the technical solutions on the motherboards, but it just seems to me that the power converter should be less of an issue now, than with the power hungry netburts?
Operandi - Friday, June 30, 2006 - link
A 8 phase design is more efficient then a 4 phase, not less.Missing Ghost - Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - link
It seems to me that the heatpipes are more for cooling the chipset in fact.erwos - Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - link
What WiFi chipset does it use? "It has WiFi" is not terribly precise.-Erwos
Wesley Fink - Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - link
The WiFi chip used on the Asus WiFi module is Realtek RTL8187L. The Features have been updated to reflect this.Wesley Fink - Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - link
Asus refers to the Wi-Fi in specifications as "WiFi Home USB wireless module supporting IEE 802.11 b/g". There is no mention at all of the supporting chip. The module is attached to the motherboard and the chip is loacated behind heatpipes. We can't read the model number, but the logo is clearly Realtek.highlnder69 - Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - link
On page 8 under Half Life 2 - SLI Gaming Performance, I think that the Asus Single/SLI results are labeled incorrectly. It's currently showing the Single card configuration with the highest FPS results and the SLI with the lowest.Wesley Fink - Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - link
You are correct, the labels were reversed. They are now corrected.DigitalFreak - Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - link
Someone needs to teach the idiots at Asus about how to design the proper motherboard layout. With an SLI setup with dual width cards, there's no PCI-E slots available.