Testbed Setup
| Testbed Setup Overclocking / Benchmark Testbed |
|
| Processor | 1 x Intel i5 870 ES CPU 2.93GHz, 8 Threads, 8MB L3 Intel i5 750 Retail 2.66GHz, 4 Threads, 8MB L3 Intel I7 920 D0 2.66GHz, 8 Threads, 8MB L3 |
| CPU Voltage | Various |
| Cooling | Intel air cooler, Heatkiller 3.0 waterblock, PA120.2 radiator and DDC ultra pump (with Petra top), 1/2 ID tubing for watercooling. |
| Power Supply | Corsair HX950 |
| Memory | Corsair Dominator GT 8-8-8-24 2200MHz 4GB kit (X2 for 8GB) G.Skill Perfect Storm 8-8-8-24 2200MHz 4GB kit. |
| Memory Settings | Various |
| Video Cards | MSI 275 Lightning (stock clocks) |
| Video Drivers | nVidia 195.62 WHQL |
| Hard Drive | Western Digital 7200RPM 1TB SATA 3/Gbps 32MB Buffer OCZ Vertex 120GB SSD |
| Optical Drives | Plextor PX-B900A, Toshiba SD-H802A |
| Case | Open Test Bed - Dimastech Benching Station Lian-Li V2110 |
| Operating System | Windows 7 64 bit |
| . | |
We utilized memory kits from Corsair> and G.Skill> to verify memory compatibility on our test boards. Our OS and primary applications are loaded on the OCZ Vertex 120GB SSD drive and our games operate off the WD Caviar Black 1TB drive. We did a clean install of the OS and applications for each motherboard.
We used Intel's stock cooler for the stock comparison testing, while water-cooling via the superlative Heat Killer 3.0 water block was utilized for overclocking. For graphics duty, we used MSI's 275 Lighting GPU to provide performance comparisons between boards during gaming benchmarks.
For our test results we set up each board as closely as possible in regards to memory timings. Otherwise all other settings are left on auto. The P55 utilized 8GB of DDR3 (apart from DFI's MI-T36 which is limited to 4GB), while the X58 platform contained 6GB. The P55 and X58 DDR3 timings were set to 7-7-7-20 1T at DDR3-1600 for the i7-920 and i7-870 processors at both stock and overclocked CPU settings.
We used DDR3-1333 6-6-6-18 1T timings for the i5-750 stock setup for all system benchmarks (non gaming tests) as DDR3-1600 is not natively supported at a stock BCLK setting of 133. The current DFI BIOS appears to offer the 2:12 ratio on 750 CPUs, but selecting the option reverts to 2:10 anyway. Most vendors have removed the 2:12 option for these processors because of instability issues. We expect DFI will do the same in the near future.
The 4GHz gaming results are included for fixed frequency comparison purposes only. The MI-T36 is not comfortable running these frequencies 24/7, but managed to complete our gaming suite because the processor is not loaded heavily by most 3D intensive game engines. We included these results merely to tie in with our database without having to rerun tests on a variety of boards just to cater to a single board.
Non-3D test results are all identical to the P55 boards, so we've not spent too much of our time re-running the same tests for the same numbers. We're not providing a running commentary for that section of benchmarks as there are no discernable performance differences when running each of these boards at the same operating frequency.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
38 Comments
View All Comments
michal1980 - Tuesday, January 5, 2010 - link
Wrong.Why can't you reviewers, hold these manufactures feet to the flames.
Any one in the review business actually have a backbone?
I for one, am tired of what appear to be half hearted efforts on the part of Mobo manufactures to provide products that WORK.
Bios settings not working? Harddrives disappearing? Endless loops? Usb issues, with ding ding din, USB devices? WTF?
I've bought 'cheap' boards, i've bought higher end boards, i've bought everything in the middle, I've got boards with awesome reviews, boards with few reviews.
But just about each one has issues, needs various firmware updates, etc etc, just to hit a stable medium, and have all its features work. (well almost all).
And yet, no one, no one, in the review business seems to care. The slap (loosey using the word, since yes all the tests are alot of, at the end of the day, boring work) a few tests, or a battery they run. Post some benchmarkers, and basically call it a day. Not only that, but the bigger the reviewer, the more likely they have, and get access to actual support teams/ engineers, that get them around issues.
A regular cosumter? phhff, go on some forum and hope others have found the solution, because the CS you'll get is likely some idiot csr reading of a script, who's only goal in life is to churn support calls/emails to get a bonus, actually fixing a problem? HA.
BTW, problems which should have been caught by the manufacture INITIALY.
How hard is it to see if your bios settings actually do something? How hard is it to check how much power your board can supply without killing it self?
Which leads me back to review sites. Do you even care? You slap some winning stickers on some mobo's. and then go on to the next project you have to test. meanwhile your readers are stuck working with a product that in reality is half arsed garabage, they spent hunderds on, then countless hours patching, setting up, refining, etc etc, just to get it working... Doing the real testing, the testing companies should be doing, and reviewers should be checking.
Shame on all of you.
Rajinder Gill - Tuesday, January 5, 2010 - link
Hi Michael,All of the info is up on the first page - bold enough for all to see. The only poitive spin here is that we're glad someone is working with the M-ITX form factor because we genuinely want to see more vendors offer such products. That's what we're trying to promote.
DFI's mistake was openeing up overclocking functions on the shipping BIOS that the board is not realy designed to make use of. Keep the board a stock or below 160 BCLK and 99% of the issues I mentioned dissappear. Its not perfect, but the info is there and you decide if the issues mentioned are worthy of purchase or not. If not, then at least you got a heads up of what we found and the fact we asked for fixes. Having all of this on the front page is not an attempt to hide it or a cover angle. We give vendors 2 chances during the test period to respond with fixes, if they're not forthcoming we won't delay the review.
regards
Raja
Zebo - Tuesday, January 5, 2010 - link
Appreciate some reviews like this tech but no conclusions?Zebo - Tuesday, January 5, 2010 - link
This board needs wireless to be complete. Wireless N preferred. With only one slot, and no OB video you're left in cold with regard to wireless unless you want dongles hanging off the back of case. DFI needs to consider wireless.Rajinder Gill - Tuesday, January 5, 2010 - link
Hi Zebo,The 'conclusion' is on the first page. We changed the layout of motherboard articles few months ago just to provide you guys with all the info in one place.
regards
Raja
Mr Perfect - Tuesday, January 5, 2010 - link
Heh. It's supposed to e like that? I thought something broke.Still, are some of the pages out of order? The benchmarks are four pages before the specs of what's being tested, so all through the graphs I was thinking "This tells me nothing. What was tested?".
Rajinder Gill - Tuesday, January 5, 2010 - link
Hi2nd page is performance summary, for a quick overview (main tests) of how the board compares to others. After that, features/layout followed by the complete test resuslts.
regards
Raja
notposting - Monday, January 4, 2010 - link
Do you mean watts? I would love to see 90 (or 110) amps go through that thing.Rajinder Gill - Monday, January 4, 2010 - link
Hi,It's amps. Stock TDP of some CPU's is more than 90 watts, so you'd be somewhat concerned if that were the max power limit of the board. 1.40 VID max with 90amps gives you a max wattage of 126w.
later
Raja
piasabird - Monday, January 4, 2010 - link
If DFI is marketing a motherboard for HTPC/DVR use then why use a chipset that basically supports mostly Quad Processors. May be overkill for HTPC. Might be nice to see more processor support for this socket.