Soltek Qbic EQ3401M: More Expansion & A New Standard in Quietness
by Wesley Fink on October 6, 2003 12:12 AM EST- Posted in
- Systems
Soltek Qbic EQ3401M: The Test
The full suite of benchmarks were run with our standard ATI Radeon 9800 PRO video card, to provide better data for comparison to the performance of other 865/875 systems. Mounting the 9800 PRO was a challenge, but once it was installed, the Soltek Qbic was trouble-free in our benchmarks. The system ran cool and stable even with our standard 3.0GHz Pentium 4 as our CPU.There was one unusual setting required by the Soltek. In our other SFF benchmarks, the Mushkin memory had run fine at 2-2-2-6 memory timings. On the Qbic EQ3401M, we found we had to relax timings a small amount to 2-2-3-6 for complete stability. This represents a RAS-to-CAS setting of 3 instead of the 2 that normally works fine with the Mushkin PC3500 L2 at DDR400.
| Performance Test Configuration | |
| Processor(s): | Intel 3.0 800FSB Pentium 4 |
| RAM: | 2 x 512MB Mushkin PC3500 Level II DS 2 x 256MB Corsair 3200LL SS |
| Hard Drive(s): | Maxtor 120GB 7200 RPM (8MB Buffer) Western Digital 120GB 7200 RPM (8MB Buffer) |
| Bus Master Drivers: | Intel INF Update v5.00.1012 Intel IAA for 875P RAID not installed for consistency of Test Results |
| Video Card(s): | On-board Intel Extreme Graphics ATI Radeon 9800 PRO 128MB (AGP 8X) |
| Video Drivers: | Intel 82865G Graphics Controller 6.13.10.3510 ATI Catalyst 3.6 |
| Operating System(s): | Windows XP Professional SP1 |
| Motherboards: | Soltek Qbic EQ3401M Biostar iDEQ 200T @ 200.8 MHz Shuttle XPC SB65G2 (865PE) @2 00.5 MHz Asus P4C800-E (875P) @ 200.5 MHz ABIT IS7-G (865PE) ABIT IC7-G (875P) Gigabyte 8KNXP (875P) |
Recent performance tests on Intel 875/865 boards used 2 x 512MB Mushkin PC3500 Level II Double-bank memory. Previous tests of Intel motherboards used 2 x 256MB Corsair 3200LL Version 1.1.
All performance tests with the ATI 9800 PRO 128MB video card were run with the AGP Aperture set to 128MB with Fast Write enabled. Resolution in all benchmarks is 1024x768x32.
Additions to Performance Tests
We have standardized on ZD Labs Internet Content Creation Winstone 2003 and ZD Labs Business Winstone 2002 for system benchmarking. We are no longer reporting SysMark2002 results as part of our standard benchmark suite.Game Benchmarks
We have added Gun Metal DirectX Benchmark 2 from Yeti Labs as a standard game benchmark. We are also evaluating the new X2 Benchmark, which includes Transform and Lighting effects as part of the standard benchmarks. Results are reported here for reference. Jedi Knight II has been dropped form our standard Benchmark Suite. We were forced to use different patches for operation on Athlon and Intel Pentium 4, which made cross-platform comparison difficult, if not impossible. In addition, Opteron/Athlon64 requires a 3rd patching variation for benchmarking. JK2 uses a Quake engine, and we are continuing Quake3 as a standard benchmark for the time being.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
20 Comments
View All Comments
ducsauce - Saturday, January 24, 2004 - link
Does anyone know whether this would accomodate the upcoming Prescott? I have one that's been sitting around for months. I've been waiting for the new 90nm procs but wonder whether it'll be compatible.thanks
Anonymous User - Friday, October 17, 2003 - link
www.newegg.com carry it, but not in stock till oct 31,Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 15, 2003 - link
U. S Suppliers please??Anonymous User - Tuesday, October 7, 2003 - link
2 5.25" bays? woohoo - this means that I can now get my 4 drive raid 10 array in one :)What do you lot think? 2 drives in the 5.25s, one in the floppy 3.5 and one normal drive bay. The raid card in the pci slot, a Radeon 9700 pro in the agp and a DVDRW/CDRW combo in an external case on the USB2.
Lan is already in, sound too - what else do i need? (a P4 2.4c and a pair of geil platinums)
My only reservation is the power supply - I know for a fact that (using an extenal meter that measures power drain) my rig pulls 220W when running 3dmark2001 and copying 2 files simultaniously and the only real difference is an SB live and my p4 is a 2.4b. Im just not sure that even 250w will be enough.
Anonymous User - Tuesday, October 7, 2003 - link
I still would get the Shuttle SB65G2 or SB75G2 , who cares about quiet? I need colling and performance. What y'all think?Anonymous User - Monday, October 6, 2003 - link
Put anything next to an 800W amp in a cramped stereo rack and you will have cooling problems.Anonymous User - Monday, October 6, 2003 - link
I agree. Could we have some temp. readings of the case and of the rear exhaust. I currently have an older Shuttle SV25 and the case gets really hot at times. I already burned out one powersupply. I am mostly concerned about temperature since I use these SFFs as stero components along with the rest of my stero equipment. Put a little computer next to a 800W amplifier in a cramped stero rack and you will have cooling problems.Anonymous User - Monday, October 6, 2003 - link
Apple introduced the Cube back in July 2000, if I recall correctly. But then again, the Next Cube came out long before that (Oct. 1988!). It was a fairly big cube, though. Of course, if you go really far back, things like the Sinclair were, um, small, too.Anyway, it seems like the Shuttle, Biostar and Soltek (that were recently reviewed) are all good PCs. Praising the Soltek for having more capacity is a little odd, though, since I thought the whole point is for these to be small.
I'm shopping for a new system right now and have gone back and forth between mid tower, laptop, and SFF, and between Shuttle, Biostar, and Soltek. I think I've settled upon the Shuttle, though, since it's the smallest while still being full featured. (And it will take an ati 9800xt, unlike a laptop. Sweet!)
Anonymous User - Monday, October 6, 2003 - link
#9 I'm no apple lover by any means but #6 is right the apple launched the Apple ICube quite a while before shuttle started making sff computers.Anonymous User - Monday, October 6, 2003 - link
#9 what do you consider to be a sff?i remember some macs being very small(compared to hulking pc's at the time).
while i cant say for a FACT that they were the 'first' to make a sff, i can say that i have seen similar sff-like-macs many, many years ago.
btw, i am not #6, i am some other person.