Articles: Mainboards
 

Bookmark and Share

(1) 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 ]

Overclocking Specifics

During overclocking the additional heatsink over the processor voltage regulator components heated up really bad, so we had to use an additional fan for it. The board started up fine at 4.8 GHz CPU clock, but lowered it to 3.8-3.9 GHz during the tests. It turned out that we had to increase the “Power Limit” setting in the BIOS to ensure that the CPU would work at the set frequency under heavy load, although other mainboards usually do it automatically. The technology counteracting the processor voltage drop under heavy load did work, but it increased the voltage so much that we had to give it up in the end. Despite all effort we couldn’t get our processor to remain stable at 4.8 GHz, so we had to stop at 4.7 GHz.

I have to point out, however, that all processor power-saving technologies worked perfectly fine during overclocking reducing the processor clock multiplier and Vcore in idle mode.

Performance Comparison

As usual, we are going to compare the mainboards speeds in two different modes: in nominal mode and during CPU and memory overclocking. The first mode is interesting because it shows how well the mainboards work with their default settings. It is a known fact that most users do not fine-tune their systems, they simply choose the optimal BIOS settings and do nothing else. That is why we run a round of tests almost without interfering in any way with the default mainboard settings. For the sake of comparison, we also tested Asus P8P67 Pro mainboards in the same exact modes. The results of Biostar TP67XE are marked with darker color for your convenience.

We used Cinebench 11.5. All tests were run five times and the average result of the five runs was taken for the performance charts.

We have been using Fritz Chess Benchmark utility for a long time already and it proved very illustrative. It generated repeated results, the performance in it is scales perfectly depending on the number of involved computational threads.

A small video in x264 HD Benchmark 3.0 is encoded in two passes and then the entire process is repeated four times. The average results of the second pass are displayed on the following diagram:

We measured the performance in Adobe Photoshop using our own benchmark made from Retouch Artists Photoshop Speed Test that has been creatively modified. It includes typical editing of four 10-megapixel images from a digital photo camera:

In the archiving test a 1 GB file is compressed using LZMA2 algorithms, while other compression settings remain at defaults.

Like in the data compression test, the faster 16 million of Pi digits are calculated, the better. This is the only benchmark where the number of processor cores doesn’t really matter, because it creates single-threaded load.

There are good and bad things about complex performance tests. However, Futuremark benchmarking software has become extremely popular and is used for comparisons a lot. The diagram below shows the average results after three test runs in 3DMark11 Performance mode with default settings:

Since we do not overclock graphics in our mainboard reviews, the next diagram shows only CPU tests from the 3DMark11 – Physics Score.

We use FC2 Benchmark Tool to go over Ranch Small map ten times in 1280x1024 resolution with medium and high image quality settings in DirectX 10.

Resident Evil 5 game also has a built-in performance test. Its peculiarity is that it can really take advantage of multi-core processor architecture. The tests were run in DirectX 10 in 1280x1024 resolution with medium image quality settings. The average of five test runs was taken for further analysis:

 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 ]

Discussion

Comments currently: 1
Discussion started: 01/31/14 11:19:11 PM
Latest comment: 01/31/14 11:19:11 PM

View comments

Add your Comment