Dual core 45nm's top out at around 510-515FSB using air cooling. Most of the quad CPU info is in the review.
We are looking at perhaps adding some more content tomorrow. Mainly 2x2GB and 4X1GB maxmimum stable overclocks and best operating points - using air cooling.
When Using 45nm dual core CPU's X48/X38 chipsets are really only 'good' to around 500FSB tops for 24/7, after this VMCH requirements and total stability with low tRD becomes futile rather quickly. SOme of the DDR3 boards are a little better in this regard, though this overhaed always comes at a high voltage price when used with a suitably high CPU multiplier.
65nm CPU's in dual core form may cruise upto 550fsb with some work, perhaps a 67% GTL table will help for that. Many of the benches in the review were run at 8x500FSB just to reflect the maximum 24/7 somebody is likely to be able to achieve and/or use consistently. FSB values over this are prone to failure in applications like PC Mark Vantage or 3D in some instance (even with lots of GTL work). Our E8500 processor managed 510FSB with 4X1GB maximum stable on this board, while using 2x1GB memory allowed me to boot at a around 520FSB - though this was far from being called stable.
Am I imaging things or something fishy is going on here?
The board has 2 PCIe 2.0 x16 slots - from the X48 MCH. OK.
The board has the following PCIe devices connected to the ICH9R:
1. PCIe x1 slot
2. PCIe x1 JMB363 SATA/PATA controller
3. PCIe x1 Marvell 88E8052 Gigabit Ethernet controller
4. PCIe x1 Marvell 88E8053 Gigabit Ethernet controller
5. PCIe x4 slot (physical x16)
IMHO in this situation the x4 slot can be utilized as x4 only if at least 2 of the PCIe x1 devices are disabled? (if so, then wich exactly?) But this is not mentioned anywhere - neighter in the review, nor in the official DFI specifications or manual. Also, in the manual there is no BIOS settings description section - so I can't find what does the "PCIE Slot Config - 1X 1X" option stand for? (I assume for putting the x4/x16 slot in x1/x16 mode when the other devices are not disabled?)
I have found that what people like to consider "stable" is only stable because of the use of applications like P95, Everest, OCCT, & Memtest86+, which don't tend to really stress 4+ GB RAM & the Northbridge to the same extent as multiple instances of HCI Memtest or as LinPack.
It was very in-depth and well written. A big chunk of the memory portion seemed to focus on micron D9 chips. I have the 4gb Gskill(powerchip ICs) and would really like to see a write up on this board involving "other ICs" and maby a guide with 65nm quads.
also have you tested the performance differential between the intel and jmicron sata ports?
Although the guide says Micron I did add a comment on TRFC and double density modules. tRAS adn tRFC are the 2 tiimings that need to be changed for the most part. The boards will hold upto 450FSB and a dual core 45nm 'stable' with most of the chipset registers set to fast/more aggressive. Comments are already in the guide for 65nm CPU's pertaining to leaving the GTL controls at defaults - nothing more is really needed tbh..
I remember a time when I was considering the purchase of a midrange ASUS motherboard with a reasonable set of overclocking options in the BIOS but no PCI-E clock setting, and there was no information on the specifications page or the manual as to how that setting would behave when overclocking. I then wrote to ASUS asking if the PCI-E clock was always locked by the board at 100 or if it would vary according to the CPU clock setting, and was actually told by an ASUS support "technician" to "go read a book on overclocking". I managed to get the info later on a forum from a person who owned the board and was kind enough to check it out for me. And that is, when ASUS support doesn't simply delete your support inquiry.
With DFI I've managed to actually have short conversations with the technical support staff in the past, was able to report minor BIOS bugs and see them fixed on the next release, etc., so at least for me it's not just a question of whether a DFI motherboard can reach a few MHz more than an ASUS competitor or not on this or that benchmark, it's also all about the feeling of satisfaction from owning a product made by a company that has this kind of attitude towards users, and that always does their best to meet the needs and wishes of enhusiasts. I'll gladly pay more for a DFI product anytime.
This applies in relation to the FSB limits of the quad cores only ON THIS board; 400 FSB at a trd running near 5-6 will give you a read delay time of around 13ns. Anything over 420 FSB needs a hike in trd while 440+ you need to be looking twoards a trd of 8 which is a delay of 17ns. The drop in write/copy speed bandwidth by reverting to 400FSB is only 500mbs while reads gain 500mbs running the lower tRD (swings and roundabouts). Now factor the VTT and VMCH requiremnts of the higher FSB and it becomes to click.
For more insight into this, 2 of our articles here will explain the fundammnetals and reasoning a little better.
Other boards which vcan hit higher FSB's and low tRDs change these rules a little. But for the most part, the truth is that FSB overcloking on the quads and Joe Public - 400FSB really is realistic and attainable with real stability - and this is important to a majority of our readers. Of course, we still use our cascades from time to time and hammer the boards real hard without any of the logic written here applied.
The interetsing part comes as no surprise - yup - this all favors unlocked multiplier processors aka QX9650 and 9770 class, just up the FSB - keep the tRD low and hey presto!
The beauty of this board is that it gets close to that tRD 12.5ns latency time at 400FSB at 1.25VMCH and 8GB of memory with no need for GTL tuning- easy as pie- with performance that you can't swing anywhere else using a 12mb cache quad on this board.
It's the wicked fast 400Mbps version, rather than 800Mbps. Wouldn't want to advance the field. Nope, let's use the 10 year old ancient variety, rather than the 5 year old less ancient variety.
I've got an even better idea... Why not throw in some USB 1.1 ports.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
24 Comments
Back to Article
orangeblue - Friday, June 13, 2008 - link
hi,can anybody tell me if the ocz flex 9200 4gb-kit(2x2048) workz too instead the four 1024 plz.
Zoomer - Saturday, May 3, 2008 - link
I miss the analysis of other features than just plain memory latency.Max fsb overclock, max mem overclock, etc?
Running the board at 400fsb seems boring - lots of P965 boards can best that. Tons of people don't buy these multiplier unlocked chips.
Rajinder Gill - Sunday, May 4, 2008 - link
Hi,Dual core 45nm's top out at around 510-515FSB using air cooling. Most of the quad CPU info is in the review.
We are looking at perhaps adding some more content tomorrow. Mainly 2x2GB and 4X1GB maxmimum stable overclocks and best operating points - using air cooling.
When Using 45nm dual core CPU's X48/X38 chipsets are really only 'good' to around 500FSB tops for 24/7, after this VMCH requirements and total stability with low tRD becomes futile rather quickly. SOme of the DDR3 boards are a little better in this regard, though this overhaed always comes at a high voltage price when used with a suitably high CPU multiplier.
65nm CPU's in dual core form may cruise upto 550fsb with some work, perhaps a 67% GTL table will help for that. Many of the benches in the review were run at 8x500FSB just to reflect the maximum 24/7 somebody is likely to be able to achieve and/or use consistently. FSB values over this are prone to failure in applications like PC Mark Vantage or 3D in some instance (even with lots of GTL work). Our E8500 processor managed 510FSB with 4X1GB maximum stable on this board, while using 2x1GB memory allowed me to boot at a around 520FSB - though this was far from being called stable.
regards
Raja
Zoomer - Wednesday, May 7, 2008 - link
Thanks for taking the time to respond.Unfortunately, I have not been keeping up with the latest tweaks on the best boards. Thanks for the detail, though. :)
amalinov - Friday, May 2, 2008 - link
Am I imaging things or something fishy is going on here?The board has 2 PCIe 2.0 x16 slots - from the X48 MCH. OK.
The board has the following PCIe devices connected to the ICH9R:
1. PCIe x1 slot
2. PCIe x1 JMB363 SATA/PATA controller
3. PCIe x1 Marvell 88E8052 Gigabit Ethernet controller
4. PCIe x1 Marvell 88E8053 Gigabit Ethernet controller
5. PCIe x4 slot (physical x16)
IMHO in this situation the x4 slot can be utilized as x4 only if at least 2 of the PCIe x1 devices are disabled? (if so, then wich exactly?) But this is not mentioned anywhere - neighter in the review, nor in the official DFI specifications or manual. Also, in the manual there is no BIOS settings description section - so I can't find what does the "PCIE Slot Config - 1X 1X" option stand for? (I assume for putting the x4/x16 slot in x1/x16 mode when the other devices are not disabled?)
n7 - Tuesday, April 29, 2008 - link
Great stuff.I have one concern though.
What are you using to test stability for 8 GB?
I have found that what people like to consider "stable" is only stable because of the use of applications like P95, Everest, OCCT, & Memtest86+, which don't tend to really stress 4+ GB RAM & the Northbridge to the same extent as multiple instances of HCI Memtest or as LinPack.
Just curious is all.
Rajinder Gill - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link
HCI memtest seems the way to go for me for memory NBGTL related stuff.For CPU core testing Prime/PC Mark Vantage (Blu-Ray test).regards
Raja
aldy402 - Tuesday, April 29, 2008 - link
great review RajinderIt was very in-depth and well written. A big chunk of the memory portion seemed to focus on micron D9 chips. I have the 4gb Gskill(powerchip ICs) and would really like to see a write up on this board involving "other ICs" and maby a guide with 65nm quads.
also have you tested the performance differential between the intel and jmicron sata ports?
well done
-Aldy
Rajinder Gill - Tuesday, April 29, 2008 - link
HI Andy,Although the guide says Micron I did add a comment on TRFC and double density modules. tRAS adn tRFC are the 2 tiimings that need to be changed for the most part. The boards will hold upto 450FSB and a dual core 45nm 'stable' with most of the chipset registers set to fast/more aggressive. Comments are already in the guide for 65nm CPU's pertaining to leaving the GTL controls at defaults - nothing more is really needed tbh..
regards
Raja
coolbluewater - Tuesday, April 29, 2008 - link
Replacing two of the six USB ports ith two eSata ports would seem to make sense. Not sure why they didn't do this on a board in this price range.Ephebus - Tuesday, April 29, 2008 - link
I remember a time when I was considering the purchase of a midrange ASUS motherboard with a reasonable set of overclocking options in the BIOS but no PCI-E clock setting, and there was no information on the specifications page or the manual as to how that setting would behave when overclocking. I then wrote to ASUS asking if the PCI-E clock was always locked by the board at 100 or if it would vary according to the CPU clock setting, and was actually told by an ASUS support "technician" to "go read a book on overclocking". I managed to get the info later on a forum from a person who owned the board and was kind enough to check it out for me. And that is, when ASUS support doesn't simply delete your support inquiry.With DFI I've managed to actually have short conversations with the technical support staff in the past, was able to report minor BIOS bugs and see them fixed on the next release, etc., so at least for me it's not just a question of whether a DFI motherboard can reach a few MHz more than an ASUS competitor or not on this or that benchmark, it's also all about the feeling of satisfaction from owning a product made by a company that has this kind of attitude towards users, and that always does their best to meet the needs and wishes of enhusiasts. I'll gladly pay more for a DFI product anytime.
Intelman07 - Monday, April 28, 2008 - link
Is there a reason Anandtech reconmends ~400FSB for quad core, does a lower multiplier and a higher FSB increase performance more in a quad core chip?Rajinder Gill - Monday, April 28, 2008 - link
Hi Intelman07,This applies in relation to the FSB limits of the quad cores only ON THIS board; 400 FSB at a trd running near 5-6 will give you a read delay time of around 13ns. Anything over 420 FSB needs a hike in trd while 440+ you need to be looking twoards a trd of 8 which is a delay of 17ns. The drop in write/copy speed bandwidth by reverting to 400FSB is only 500mbs while reads gain 500mbs running the lower tRD (swings and roundabouts). Now factor the VTT and VMCH requiremnts of the higher FSB and it becomes to click.
For more insight into this, 2 of our articles here will explain the fundammnetals and reasoning a little better.
http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=3208&am...">http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=3208&am...
and also logical approach to system tuning using Kris' excellent groundwork.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...">http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...
Other boards which vcan hit higher FSB's and low tRDs change these rules a little. But for the most part, the truth is that FSB overcloking on the quads and Joe Public - 400FSB really is realistic and attainable with real stability - and this is important to a majority of our readers. Of course, we still use our cascades from time to time and hammer the boards real hard without any of the logic written here applied.
The interetsing part comes as no surprise - yup - this all favors unlocked multiplier processors aka QX9650 and 9770 class, just up the FSB - keep the tRD low and hey presto!
The beauty of this board is that it gets close to that tRD 12.5ns latency time at 400FSB at 1.25VMCH and 8GB of memory with no need for GTL tuning- easy as pie- with performance that you can't swing anywhere else using a 12mb cache quad on this board.
Hope that clears it up a little..
regards
Raja
Bozo Galora - Monday, April 28, 2008 - link
Another great article by AT's best reviewer.I have read somewhere DFI's top X48 board gonna have ICH10R and cost ~$400??
Slash3 - Monday, April 28, 2008 - link
Page 2 states "The expansion slot layout is comprised of three PCI Express x16 slots (two x16 and one x4 slot), and three PCI slots."The board itself has 3 physical PCI-E 16x slots and 1 PCI-E 4x slot though, so the sentence is kind of ambiguous.
takumsawsherman - Monday, April 28, 2008 - link
It's the wicked fast 400Mbps version, rather than 800Mbps. Wouldn't want to advance the field. Nope, let's use the 10 year old ancient variety, rather than the 5 year old less ancient variety.I've got an even better idea... Why not throw in some USB 1.1 ports.
Rob94hawk - Monday, April 28, 2008 - link
I got all excited and then I saw DDR2....Might as well just replace PCIE with AGP while their at it.
Rajinder Gill - Monday, April 28, 2008 - link
Just contacted DFI, they are aiming at retail launch of the DDR3 version on the 20th May..Review sample boards should ship within the next week..
regards
Raja
Rajinder Gill - Monday, April 28, 2008 - link
EDIT: Make that early June for full retail (allowing for shipping time etc)..regards
Raja
Rob94hawk - Wednesday, April 30, 2008 - link
Will be looking forward to it. Thank you.lopri - Monday, April 28, 2008 - link
Sorry if I missed it but I can't locate it?Rajinder Gill - Monday, April 28, 2008 - link
Hi,There is no PDF, it is an Adobe flash player video on page 14..
regards
Raja
Kromis - Monday, April 28, 2008 - link
I'm loving the green!Kromis - Monday, April 28, 2008 - link
I haven't heard/read much from DFI in a while