Madshrimps Forum Madness

Madshrimps Forum Madness (https://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/)
-   Articles & Howto's (https://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f6/)
-   -   Another P55 round-up: Asus/Asus/DFI (https://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f6/another-p55-round-up-asus-asus-dfi-67803/)

Massman 17th November 2009 13:49

Another P55 round-up: Asus/Asus/DFI
 
1 Attachment(s)

jmke 17th November 2009 13:59

Tell me again how many PCIe slots that SuperComputer has? :)

Massman 17th November 2009 14:39

4 afaik

jmke 17th November 2009 14:41

one more :)

Quote:

Expansion Slots
PCI Express 2.0 x16 2 x PCIe 2.0 x16 (@ x16 or x8)
2 x PCIe 2.0 x16 (@ x8)
PCI Express x16 1 x PCIe x16 (@ x4 )
PCI Express x1 1
PCI Slots 1
but the fifth one is online @x4

Massman 17th November 2009 15:12

that's what I meant? :p

Massman 18th November 2009 18:05

Awaiting the MSI Trinergy board to start testing :-)

nigel 18th November 2009 18:18

sweet :o

moy2010 30th November 2009 16:58

Nice :D. Let's see how will perform the DFI against the other ones :).

Massman 5th December 2009 23:39

Just set up the test rig.

Does anyone actually care about bios photo's? Takes a shitload of time to make and manage them ... if no one cares, I could just skip that phase.

leeghoofd 6th December 2009 02:09

I would still include them PJ ( sorry for the extra trouble )

jmke 6th December 2009 10:11

I disagree LH
I would only make shots of those settings which are interesting for OC :)

leeghoofd 6th December 2009 11:19

ofcourse not all that other stuff (boot sequence,tralala)... voltages, tweaks, hardware monitoring page is interesting too, etc or some special stuff to look for...

Massman 6th December 2009 12:27

Just finishing the tests on the Asus P7P55 WS Supercomputer. For 2D, this board is really fast!

Leeghoofd, I'll need the Acard back for the PCMark05 benchmarks.

leeghoofd 6th December 2009 12:42

I need so many things :p, wanna swap it for the REX II ? Need to get that waterblock thing started...

Acard, another thing to add to the list then

Massman 6th December 2009 12:57

Yeah. Finished my -ehrm- secret tests. I'll make sure you can take it home with ya.

Just setup the Maximus III Formula. Let's see how it works!

leeghoofd 6th December 2009 13:24

mmm I love secrets, I will never tell, I promise, just my neighbours and girlfriends will know

Massman 6th December 2009 13:27

Oops. The word secret is under NDA

Massman 6th December 2009 15:11

Dfi seems to be the most performant 32M board at this moment

Massman 6th December 2009 21:17

Last board on the test bench: Big Bang Trinergy :D

Massman 7th December 2009 11:36

2 Attachment(s)
Some pictures of the bench system ... for those who are interested.




Massman 9th December 2009 22:01

The Maximus III Formula is not even capable of finishing the 3.8GHz tests ... all other boards do this fluently ... :-/

leeghoofd 10th December 2009 04:38

seems something you are missing or that sample is really flakey

Massman 10th December 2009 10:02

I've changed bioses now, same issue. I'll remount the cpu cooler.

Massman 11th December 2009 10:14

Cooler was mounted perfectly, but the mainboard is getting worse and worse.

Kurgan 11th December 2009 10:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Massman (Post 250295)
Cooler was mounted perfectly, but the mainboard is getting worse and worse.

Massman,

What CPU are you using with the OC? Very interested in how this goes as I'm thinking of picking up one of these myself.

Also, is it a Engineering Sample or full retail?

Thanks for the info,

Kurg

Massman 11th December 2009 10:20

Core i5 750, full retail.

leeghoofd 11th December 2009 12:16

it has probably been tested to the bone by the previous reviewer/ competition...

Better ask Milan for a new one

Massman 11th December 2009 12:23

Must be the motherboard ... just switched cpu and cooler to the UD6 and 3.8GHz is perfectly stable here. I didn't even change or add cooling paste.

Massman 21st December 2009 20:31

Last board is on the test bench. In total, I will have 405 benchmark results ... :-/

Massman 22nd December 2009 15:41

Can't believe any vendor has taken the time to fix the turbo-issues I've discussed in the first article: 3D and HDD are still hurt when you enable turbo mode :-/

Massman 22nd December 2009 15:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madshrimps, 2009-09-13
- "The PCMark05 benchmark is something different as the system score, which is used in overclocking environments, decreases quite a lot by enabling Turbo mode. Reason of that decrease seems to be the weaker scores in the graphics and hdd subtests, but why they are slower is an unanswered question at this moment. We suspect it has something to do with the way Windows manages the C-states (power saving); as C-states have to be enabled for Turbo mode to work, it may be in conflict with Windows settings. For more info about this oddity check our upcoming motherboard review."
-"In Entry mode, where the CPU frequency plays a big role, the Turbo mode is indeed faster, but more interesting are the performance and high preset results. Similar to what we saw in the PCMark05 benchmark, the more important the graphics card is, the more likely that Turbo Mode becomes slower. The question is if this issue is also present in extreme overclocking situations where, quite often, people use these turbo mode multipliers for higher clock frequencies. Something Madshrimps will definitely look into."

~ http://www.madshrimps.be/?action=get...&articID= 951

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madshrimps, 2009-09-20
- "The HDD performance takes a serious hit when enabling Turbo Mode."
- "As we also noticed in the first Core i5 article released here on Madshrimps, there's a performance problem with 3D and enabling Turbo Mode. We are still trying to pinpoint the exact cause of this problem and when we have more data we will fill you in."
"Notice how in the High preset, where the GPU is stressed more, the performance of a turbo mode configuration falls behind the non-turbo configuration, which is in line with what we see in the PCMark05 benchmark."

~ http://www.madshrimps.be/?action=get...&articID= 960

What are the results now ...







And yes - I have used newer bios versions.

jmke 22nd December 2009 15:51

so GFX test PCMark05 is failing
can you do another test with another HDD bench with/without turbo?
http://www.alex-is.de/PHP/fusion/dow...&download_id=9

Massman 22nd December 2009 15:51

FYI - the 'without turbo' is the average of all boards without turbo enabled

Massman 22nd December 2009 15:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmke (Post 251041)
so GFX test PCMark05 is failing
can you do another test with another HDD bench with/without turbo?
http://www.alex-is.de/PHP/fusion/dow...&download_id=9

The issue is present in 3Dmark Vantage as well

jmke 22nd December 2009 15:57

much less pronounced in 3Dmark Vantage, could be a timing issue related to Futuremark benches
need to verify with another 3D benchie, Crysis or so

Massman 22nd December 2009 15:59

It's significant that ALL mainboards perform lower when turbo is enabled.

jmke 22nd December 2009 16:00

yes. I agree!

Quote:

need to verify with another 3D benchie, Crysis or so
Quote:

Originally Posted by jmke (Post 251041)
can you do another test with another HDD bench with/without turbo?
http://www.alex-is.de/PHP/fusion/dow...&download_id=9


Massman 22nd December 2009 16:05

Running HDD as we speak - I'll try to install RE5 to verify ;)

Massman 22nd December 2009 18:06

2 Attachment(s)
TURBO DISABLED



TURBO ENABLED



jmke 22nd December 2009 19:03

very interesting! thanks for running those tests.

what are you using for storage? SSDs in RAID or the ACARD?
either way, I think this needs to be brought to attention of Intel and motherboard manufacturers;


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 14:36.

Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO