Gaming Performance - RTS & Simulation

While our previous tests were based around First Person Shooters we are going to take a look at how our motherboards perform with Real Time Strategy and Simulation games.

Company of Heroes

Company of Heroes is very GPU intensive and also requires a hefty CPU at times. The game contains a built-in performance test that utilizes the game engine to generate several different action scenes along with a coffee argument as a sideline distraction before the war starts. We found the performance test gives a good indication of how well your system will run the game, though some of the in-game action sequences are more demanding than the performance test. We generally found the game to be enjoyable with an average performance test frame rate above 35fps.

Gaming Performance - Company of Heroes


Rise of Legends

This game was released a few months back and like most real time strategy games is very CPU intensive but still offers a very visual experience. In order to experience the game properly you need a fast CPU, very good memory subsystem, and a decent GPU to play at the higher resolutions. We utilize FRAPS to capture the results from our replay file. Our benchmark consists of a one on one player game that takes approximately an hour to complete with some significant action throughout the game. Our camera movements are constant as we try to out play each other with a general tank rush between the two Vinci sides every few minutes. We set all video options to high but disable AA, although we found it makes very little difference in the performance of the game at the lower resolutions. We generally found the game to be enjoyable with an average frame rate above 35fps.

Gaming Performance - Rise of Legends


Age of Empires III

Age of Empires III was released last fall and was recently updated with The WarChiefs expansion pack. In testing with the WarChiefs expansion pack we did not notice any measurable differences in performance so our benchmark will be reflective of gameplay with this expansion pack. This particular game requires a decent CPU and a very capable GPU when utilizing the antialiasing options.

We once again utilize FRAPS to capture the results from our replay file. Our benchmark consists of a four player scenario that takes approximately an hour to complete. Our playback file follows the action of the best player on our staff as he generally is involved in attacks from an early point in the game until he decimates everyone at the end. The camera movements are constant as is the action so we feel like this benchmark represents the typical game. We set all video options to high but disable AA. We generally found the game to be enjoyable with an average frame rate above 40fps.

Gaming Performance - Age of Empires III


GT Legends

Our final game is a racing simulation introduced last year that generally delivers a very accurate portrayal of driving the top sports cars in the 1960s and 1970s on some of the world's finest race tracks. The game is an update to GTR with improved physics and graphics. GTR2 was recently released but we were unable to test it in time for this roundup. Our test consists of racing our Mustang around the Monza GP track for three laps and capturing the results with FRAPS. We set all in-game options to their highest settings but disable AA, even though we feel the game requires it for an enjoyable experience from the cockpit. The performance penalty on level three AA is minimal. We generally found the game to be enjoyable with an average frame rate above 45fps.

Gaming Performance - GT Legends


RTS/Sim Gaming Summary

Our results follow the FPS benchmark scores with all of the P965 boards scoring very close to each other. We still see the 975X trailing the other boards but our ASUS 570SLI is suddenly competitive with the P965 offerings. Once again, the Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3 motherboard is consistently at the top but we now find it joined by the Biostar 965PT board. We spent numerous hours testing each game in single player and online multiplayer modes with the audio system enabled. We did not notice any issues during our game play experiences at stock or overclocked settings.

Gaming Performance - FPS Overclocking Performance
Comments Locked

23 Comments

View All Comments

  • Marlin1975 - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link

    The biggest problem I, and seems like most, have with 965 chipsets is the JMicron JMB363 IDE. You said there is a driver problem for the newwest driver but did not say what driver that is? Like 13.03, 15, etc... I think I have a new driver then someone in the forums has one that is 2 whole numbers newwer.

    I have a hard time trying to find a decent driver so I just get what I can for the JMicron JMB363. My DVD burner just comes up in windows as a reg. drive and I can;t get windows to see that it is a burner. Mind you Nero sees it as a burner. So I am guessing that is a JMicron JMB363.

    I like my Gigabyte board, better then the Asus I had. But the lack of IDE support by Intel makes me want to get a Nvidia 600i board even more.
  • jackylman - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link

    The Biostar 965PT (and, I assume, the Deluxe) includes a VIA VT6401 IDE controller instead of the Jmicron. I had no problems seeing the controller in the BIOS or getting my optical drive to run in DMA.

    Just another reason that this board rules.
  • Viditor - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link

    The biggest problem I have encountered seems like a small one, but it's getting annoying.
    It seems that none of the 965 boards allow for 2 x PATA connectors...I don't know for sure, but I assume this is a limitation of the chipset.
    The problem I keep running into is the reuse of existing components for an upgrade. Obviously you need one of the PATAs for the optical drives, which means that unless you get a PATA controller card you can't reuse your existing PATA drives...
  • Sho - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link

    The P965 chipset doesn't have any PATA support by itself, so the mobo makers need to include a seperate controller.
  • BladeVenom - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link

    Nice to see the less expensive models getting a thorough review. Everyone reviews the Biostar Deluxe, even though it's almost impossible to find, unless you're a reviewer.

    Also nice to see that model of Crucial RAM used. Next time you do a budget review could you also test the cheapest memory available, and 1:1 ratio for overclocking be damned.

  • Gary Key - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link

    quote:

    Also nice to see that model of Crucial RAM used. Next time you do a budget review could you also test the cheapest memory available, and 1:1 ratio for overclocking be damned.


    We are still testing lower priced memory. I will add some addtional overclocking results to these two boards tomorrow. :)
  • BladeVenom - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link

    Thanks.
  • DaveLessnau - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link

    I might have missed the reason for this in the write-ups. If so, I apologize. But, why aren't you reviewing any Intel boards? I'd have thought that they'd provide a decent baseline for comparison to see if the other manufacturers can do any better/different.
  • Gary Key - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link

    The Intel board we originally received has been pulled from retail availability. We have a BLKDP965LTCK coming next week to take its place. I believe this board currently retails for $110~$115. I will do my best to at least get performance numbers from this board in our charts before the final article goes up.
  • Sho - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link

    ... where's that high-end board roundup hiding? IIRC an Anandtech staffer had announced it for last Friday in a comment to another article about two weeks back.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now