<%BANNER[top_768x90]%>
<%BANNER[banner_468x60_h]%>
<%BANNER[article]%>

Articles: Mainboards

<%BANNER[fp_160x600_r_1]%>
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 ]

Performance

Performance tests traditionally end up our reviews. We configured the following testbed:

  • Athlon XP 3200+ CPU;
  • DFI LAN PARTY NFII Ultra mainboard;
  • 2x256MB OCZ PC3700 EL DDR SDRAM;
  • Seagate Barracuda ATA IV 40GB HDD;
  • ATI RADEON 9700 PRO graphics card;
  • nForce2 drivers 2.03;
  • ATI Catalyst 3.6.

Memory worked in sync mode with 2-2-2-5 timings. The testbed was controlled by Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 1. We used 9.0a DirectX version.

As for the version of the nForce2 driver, we used v.2.03, because v.2.45 didn’t include Accelerated IDE driver. Without it, the system performed slowly in Winstone tests that actively involve the disk subsystem. In other tests, the difference between versions 2.03 and 2.45 was pretty insignificant.

So, below are the performance results. We include the numbers for ABIT NF7-S 2.0 for better comparison. You should have already read about them in our “Modern Socket A Chipsets Review”. The testbed we used then was nearly the same as the today’s one.

 

DFI LAN PARTY

ABIT NF7-S 2.0

Business Winstone 2002, Score

36.7

39.2*

Content Creation Winstone 2003, Score

40.9

41.2*

3DMark2001 SE, Score

16504

16570

3DMark03, Score

5033

5010

3DMark03, CPU Score

641

669

PCMark2002, CPU Score

6826

-

PCMark2002, Memory Score

6242

6468

SiSoft Sandra Int RAM Buffered Bandwidth

2897

3064

UT2003, dm-antalus, 1024x768x32

72.26

72.09

Serious Sam SE, The Grand Cathedral, 1024x768x32

111.9

113.2

* - The results of these tests shouldn’t be compared as the ABIT NF7-S testbed had a different hard disk drive.

As you see, there is an evident difference in the results of memory bandwidth tests, in Business Winstone and the CPU tests from 3DMark03. As for Winstone, it would be hard to draw any definite conclusions, as the testbeds were different. The hard disk doesn’t affect the performance in memory tests, so we can state that DFI board was not the fastest here. ABIT must have taken the trouble to fine-tune the chipset parameters, while DFI didn’t. It must be lower memory bandwdith that puts the DFI mainboard down in the 3DMark03CPU tests, too. However, you shouldn’t worry too much about that, since DFI does quite well in gaming benchmarks (3DMark tests should also be considered here), running as fast as the ABIT mainboard. Overall, the performance of DFI LAN PARTY is up to the mark.

Conclusion

Summing all up, we would say that DFI LAN PARTY NFII Ultra is a very good product. It does have certain shortcomings, like only one Serial ATA port and inappropriate ATX connector placement, as well as a few minor drawbacks in the BIOS. However, when we look at all the advantages the mainboard from DFI can boast, such as a rich set of supported features, very nice PCB layout, pretty good overclocking-friendly options and functional BIOS Setup, the above mentioned drawbacks seem really trifling.

There is one thing however, that some of you may consider a great advantage, and some may regard as a real drawback of this mainboard. The accessories and extra features of the product, like the system-case bag and highlighting, cost extra money. As a result, this mainboard will be an impressive piece and a great buy on the one hand, but will cost you more than any competing product with similar features on the other. So, this is actually the main point to consider when shopping: do you want to pay extra for extra features and rich accessories pack? If yes, then don’t hesitate and go for DFI LANPARTY NFII Ultra!

Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 ]

<%BANNER[banner_468x60_f]%>

Discussion

Comments currently: 4
Discussion started: 09/01/03 02:09:10 PM
Latest comment: 09/04/04 08:44:43 PM

View comments

You must log in to add comments.

Forgot password? Registration

remember me



Latest materials in Mainboards section

Article Rating

Article Rating: 10 out of 10
 
Rate this article:
Excellent
Average
Poor