Soltek KT600-R: Fast & Promising
by Wesley Fink on September 1, 2003 12:06 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Soltek KT600-R: Stress Testing
We performed stress tests on the Soltek KT600-R in these areas and configurations:1. Chipset and motherboard stress testing, which was conducted by running the FSB at 212MHz; and
2. Memory stress testing, which was conducted by running RAM at 400MHz with 2 DIMM slots filled and at 400MHz with all 3 DIMM slots filled at the lowest memory timings possible.
Front Side Bus Stress Test Results:
As standard practice, we ran a full range of stress tests and benchmarks to ensure the Soltek KT600-R was absolutely stable at each overclocked FSB speed. These stress tests included Prime95 torture tests, which were run in the background for a total of 24 hours.In addition, we ran several other tasks (data compression, various DX8 and DX9 games, and apps like Word and Excel) while Prime95 was running in the background. Finally, we ran our benchmark suite, which includes ZD Winstone suite, Unreal Tournament 2003, SPECViewperf 7.0, and Gun Metal Benchmark 2. While we were able to boot and run some tests at speeds as high as 217MHz FSB at default voltage on the KT600-R, 212MHz was the highest overclock that we were able to achieve with the Soltek at default voltage without encountering any reliability issues.
Memory Stress Test Results:
This memory stress test is very basic, as it simply tests the ability of the KT600-R to operate at its officially supported memory frequency (400MHz DDR) at the lowest supported memory timings that our Corsair TwinX LL modules support:| Stable DDR400 Timings (2/3 banks populated) |
|
| Clock Speed: | 200MHz |
| Timing Mode: | N/A |
| CAS Latency: | 2.0 |
| Bank Interleave: | 4 |
| RAS to CAS Delay: | (3) |
| RAS Precharge: | (2) |
| Precharge Delay: | (6) |
| Command Rate: | 2T |
Numbers in parentheses could not be set or read on the KT600-R. We checked the memory timings with SiSoft Sandra Max3. Timings were set to SPD and the reported timings are those actually used by the SPD. The Soltek KT600-R would not run with stability with a command rate of 1T. 2T was needed for stability. The same was true for 3 dimms. As we have seen in other looks at memory performance, slower memory timings do not always translate into poorer memory performance. Lowest memory timings is just one means of comparing motherboards, and it is most useful when comparing boards based on the same chipset. You will see in Performance tests how true this is with the KT600-R.
Filling all 3 available memory banks at DDR400 is more strenuous on the memory subsystem than testing 1 or 2 banks.
| Stable DDR400 Timings (3/3 banks populated) |
|
| Clock Speed: | 200MHz |
| Timing Mode: | N/A |
| CAS Latency: | 2.0 |
| Bank Interleave: | 4 |
| RAS to CAS Delay: | (3T) |
| RAS Precharge: | (6T) |
| Precharge Delay: | (2T) |
| Command Rate: | 2T |
We were pleased to see the Soltek handle the same memory timings with 3 Corsair DDR400 dimms installed as with 1 dimm installed. You can fill all 3 slots with confidence and run at the most aggressive settings your memory can handle. Please keep in mind that the real world performance difference between aggressive memory timings and more relaxed memory timings can be very small. SPD timings will work just fine 99% of the time.
We tested all these memory timings using several stress tests and general applications to guarantee stability. Prime95 torture tests were successfully run at the timings listed in the above charts. We also ran Sciencemark (memory tests only) and Super Pi. None of the three stress tests created stability problems for the Soltek KT600-R at these memory timings.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
14 Comments
View All Comments
Anonymous User - Sunday, October 5, 2003 - link
I agree, get rid of the flash.Anonymous User - Friday, September 5, 2003 - link
As a system builder who has been using Soltek motherboard for around 18 months in new systems that we build, I recently found out that Soltek do not replace motherboards that fail under warranty. Instead they have to be sent back to the factory in Taiwan where Soltek repair them.This is obviously unacceptable, particularly for a business user who can't afford to be without a PC for a month. If you agree, please send email to donald@soltek.com.tw to tell them what you think
In fairness to Soltek, their motherboards are very reliable, so its never been an issure until just recently for us. As a connsequence, we now use another brand of motherboard in the PCs we build.
Please feel free to contact me on peter@ctsgrafton.com.au
Anonymous User - Thursday, September 4, 2003 - link
Nice review Wes. But I dont' like the flash either, seems like it doesn't always show up ???Anonymous User - Wednesday, September 3, 2003 - link
#10, you're stupid. Flash is used by any large web site nowadays. Get used to it.Anonymous User - Wednesday, September 3, 2003 - link
Ugh! Please get rid of the flash!Anonymous User - Tuesday, September 2, 2003 - link
No problems using three DIMM's here, even at 200MHz FSB/Memory operation. (above official specs) Not being able to go nuts on the timings doesn't really matter. Practical performance is not hurting noticeably.Wesley Fink - Monday, September 1, 2003 - link
As I have mentioned in my KT600 reviews, I have often needed to go to a Command Rate of 2 instead of the more usual 1 for best stability on the KT600 with 2 or 3 dimms. However, I have not noticed that the 2 setting degraded performance by very much. My experience has not mirrored what Kyle is reporting at HardOCP, and I really can't explain it.You can NOT use nForce2 type timings on a KT600. The boards were not designed to handle them, nor are they necessary for best memory performance. Those holding on to fast memory timings are always faster need to run a few benchmarks, because it is not always true.
Anonymous User - Monday, September 1, 2003 - link
Im surprised about the comments on stability with KT600 boards. According to HardOCP, all KT600 boards they have tested (including Abit & Epox) are quite unstable with 2 DIMMs inserted.Zepper - Monday, September 1, 2003 - link
addendum to earlier post:As I see it, the DFI SiS based mobo just reviewed really lost out by not including the P4 connector. For a budget system, you want all your costs to be kept down, not just the mobo. You will still have to shell out for an overpowered PSU to run it...
.bh.
Zepper - Monday, September 1, 2003 - link
Thanks for the good reviews, Wes! I particularly like the fact that you make an issue of the P4 power connector in AMD mobo reviews. Finally AMD fans don't have to pay for overpowered PSUs as most AMD solutions will be able to run on a good 200W PSU. Even OCd and multiple drive systems should be able to get by on a good 250Watter.. Keep drilling on the P4 - make it a big demerit in reviews of AMD mobos that lack this feature.
.bh.