ASRock ConRoe945G-DVI: Core 2 Duo goes mATX
by Gary Key on September 1, 2006 5:15 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Test Setup
Our test setup is not our normal configuration due to time constraints for generating this early look review. We are using the test configuration from our recent Core 2 Duo memory performance articles since we had a base of information with the E6300 and several competing Intel and VIA based motherboards. Also, this test configuration is well suited for this board's capabilities and would be considered a mainstream solution in regards to the overall system cost. We will have extended test results with this board in our upcoming mATX roundup utilizing additional hardware configurations.
Our configuration was operated at a resolution of 1024x768 with high quality settings for each graphics benchmark. We will have onboard graphics test results with this board in an upcoming G965 versus 945G comparison, although we were only able to complete Quake 4 testing with the Intel GMA950.
We are testing our motherboards at the fastest stable timings we can achieve and still pass our benchmark test suite. By increasing the memory voltage on the ASRock board we were able to run our Transcend modules at 3-3-3-9 at DDR2-533 and 3-4-3-10 at DDR2-667. With these set ratios our CPU speed remains the same at 1.86GHz in the test platform with memory speed being varied by selecting the different ratios. Our memory settings were derived from extensive stress testing with a variety of applications. While certain settings that allowed lower latencies worked well with certain applications, the final settings we arrived at had to work with all applications.
The Sandra bandwidth Unbuffered memory performance of the Intel 945G chipset is the highest of our group at DDR2-533 (1:1 ratio) and second highest at DDR2-667 (4:5 ratio). The Unbuffered scores of the 945G chipset increase by 10% when going from DDR2-533 to DDR2-667 which equals the same increases found on the ASRock 945P. However, both the P965 and 975X scale at a rate of approximately 15%. The buffered memory scores are very competitive with the other solutions but we usually find these scores do not correlate well with real performance in most applications. The 945G scores very well in our SuperPI 2M tests where it ties the NV 570 SLI in the DDR2-533 results and places second in the DDR2-667 test. The latency results are average but improve upon the 945P board. A very good guide to understanding how the chipset, memory, and CPU relate to each other on Intel chipsets is located here.
Our test setup is not our normal configuration due to time constraints for generating this early look review. We are using the test configuration from our recent Core 2 Duo memory performance articles since we had a base of information with the E6300 and several competing Intel and VIA based motherboards. Also, this test configuration is well suited for this board's capabilities and would be considered a mainstream solution in regards to the overall system cost. We will have extended test results with this board in our upcoming mATX roundup utilizing additional hardware configurations.
Performance Test Configuration | |
Processor: | Intel Core 2 Duo - E6300 |
RAM: | 2 x 512mb Transcend JetRam DDR2-533 |
Hard Drive(s): | 1 x Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 320GB |
System Platform Drivers: | Intel Chipset Software - 8.0.1.1002 |
Video Cards: | 1 x EVGA 7600GS (PCI Express) |
Video Drivers: | NVIDIA nForce 91.31 WHQL |
Cooling: | Scythe Infinity |
Power Supply: | OCZ GameXStream 700w |
Operating System: | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
Motherboards: | ASRock ConRoe945G-DVI ASRock 775Dual-VSTA (VIA PT880Pro) ASRock ConRoeXFire-eSATA2 (Intel 945P) Biostar TForce 965 Deluxe (Intel P965) DFI Infinity 975X/G (Intel P975X) Asus P5NSLI (NVIDIA 570SLI) |
Our configuration was operated at a resolution of 1024x768 with high quality settings for each graphics benchmark. We will have onboard graphics test results with this board in an upcoming G965 versus 945G comparison, although we were only able to complete Quake 4 testing with the Intel GMA950.
We are testing our motherboards at the fastest stable timings we can achieve and still pass our benchmark test suite. By increasing the memory voltage on the ASRock board we were able to run our Transcend modules at 3-3-3-9 at DDR2-533 and 3-4-3-10 at DDR2-667. With these set ratios our CPU speed remains the same at 1.86GHz in the test platform with memory speed being varied by selecting the different ratios. Our memory settings were derived from extensive stress testing with a variety of applications. While certain settings that allowed lower latencies worked well with certain applications, the final settings we arrived at had to work with all applications.
Click to enlarge |
The Sandra bandwidth Unbuffered memory performance of the Intel 945G chipset is the highest of our group at DDR2-533 (1:1 ratio) and second highest at DDR2-667 (4:5 ratio). The Unbuffered scores of the 945G chipset increase by 10% when going from DDR2-533 to DDR2-667 which equals the same increases found on the ASRock 945P. However, both the P965 and 975X scale at a rate of approximately 15%. The buffered memory scores are very competitive with the other solutions but we usually find these scores do not correlate well with real performance in most applications. The 945G scores very well in our SuperPI 2M tests where it ties the NV 570 SLI in the DDR2-533 results and places second in the DDR2-667 test. The latency results are average but improve upon the 945P board. A very good guide to understanding how the chipset, memory, and CPU relate to each other on Intel chipsets is located here.
33 Comments
View All Comments
Gary Key - Friday, September 1, 2006 - link
3D Performance more in alignment with the GeForce FX5600 series but with better video quality. The 6200TC would provide up to double the frame rates in Quake4 at 1024x768 HQ as an example.mino - Friday, September 1, 2006 - link
I know, it's AM2 but a little mATX roundup won't hurt.Especially with EE SFF parts and Conroe out of the gates..
Also I would love to see power comparison between different chipsets/boards.
For C2D as well as for X2.
dmce - Friday, September 1, 2006 - link
Yeah i would be very interested in this. Would also be interested in a little more info on the RS600/SB600 (Radeon Xpress 1250) boards.dmce - Friday, September 1, 2006 - link
Dont suppose you know if it supports 1080p?Would have liked to see how it coped with HD playback.
Looking forward to the mATX reviews mentioned
mino - Friday, September 1, 2006 - link
They used it with 24inch Acer DVI LCD => it works reliably up to 1920x1200 which is the top of single-link DVI spec.mino - Friday, September 1, 2006 - link
In the other word 1080p playability should depend on the CPU.dmce - Friday, September 1, 2006 - link
Thanks mate.poohbear - Friday, September 1, 2006 - link
just wanna say thanks for covering the budget mobos instead of the super high end stuff.:) I was really impressed w/ the asrock dualsata2, so nice to see their new stuff.esterhasz - Friday, September 1, 2006 - link
Great article, tnx. Would be great to have numbers for power consumtion though. In the HTPC Arena, this is a rather interesting matter...Calin - Friday, September 1, 2006 - link
Or at least subjective ratings regarding different places on the mainboard - VRM modules, chipset, ...