RD600 first look and general questions

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

12-22-2006, 03:49 PM
snowboarder

Been watching the whole RD600 thing...

The more I find out about this board the more I wonder about how cutting edge it really is. The only thing it seems to have going for it is the high fsb and the myriad of options it has in the bios. It really seems to me to be the tinkerers toy.

I've been running an RD400 board for almost a year now and couldn't be happier with it. I can overclock my Pentium D 950 3.4 to 4.1 on air, dual PCI-E x 8 for crossfire and the board is overall very stable. I also don't see the big deal with the seperate memory overclock as I have that option on my board as well.

There's really nothing new on this board and that's really a shame as its been hyped up like mad for the past 6 mos and its STILL not available after numerous delays. I feel sorry for the poor souls who have been waiting for it and who were told they would be able to purchase it on the 15th. I hope you cats are happy when you finally get your boards because from what I see and from what I've been using for the past 9 mos (RD400) it really doesn't seem like that much of an upgrade or that cutting edge for that matter.

Later!!

SB
12-22-2006, 05:39 PM
deachus

Quote:

Originally Posted by snowboarder

The more I find out about this board the more I wonder about how cutting edge it really is. The only thing it seems to have going for it is the high fsb and the myriad of options it has in the bios. It really seems to me to be the tinkerers toy.

I've been running an RD400 board for almost a year now and couldn't be happier with it. I can overclock my Pentium D 950 3.4 to 4.1 on air, dual PCI-E x 8 for crossfire and the board is overall very stable. I also don't see the big deal with the seperate memory overclock as I have that option on my board as well.

There's really nothing new on this board and that's really a shame as its been hyped up like mad for the past 6 mos and its STILL not available after numerous delays. I feel sorry for the poor souls who have been waiting for it and who were told they would be able to purchase it on the 15th. I hope you cats are happy when you finally get your boards because from what I see and from what I've been using for the past 9 mos (RD400) it really doesn't seem like that much of an upgrade or that cutting edge for that matter.

Later!!

SB

That was the most pointless post I've ever seen!! Posts like this is why there are so many pages to read through. Makes it much harder to find useful information.

I understand you have all the same options with your current motherboard. This motherboard brings all those grate options, voltages, fine tuning to CORE 2 DUO. Which outperforms your Pentium D 950 by alot. People have been waiting because they want these motherboard options for CORE 2 DUO. I believe that is what this thread is about.
12-22-2006, 05:49 PM
Lestat

Quote:

Originally Posted by deachus

That was the most pointless post I've ever seen!! Posts like this is why there are so many pages to read through. Makes it much harder to find useful information.

I understand you have all the same options with your current motherboard. This motherboard brings all those grate options, voltages, fine tuning to CORE 2 DUO. Which outperforms your Pentium D 950 by alot. People have been waiting because they want these motherboard options for CORE 2 DUO. I believe that is what this thread is about.

its only pointless if you believe that this is the end all motherboard for conroes... and its not.

the simple fact is that this board introduces NOTHING that hasnt alredy been done.

Independant ram clocking? been there - 680i/650i
High FSB ? where?? i dont see it??
when the RETAIL boards come out then we will see. but for now... been there done that. - DS3, DS4, DQ6, P5B, P5W, on and on and on,, need i keep listing baord that hit and exceed 500mhz FSB? at a much lower price point?
8x8x XFire ? so what there is 16x16x SLI which already outperforms XFire
and there are already XFire boards available.
0.006v Droop at 1.5v ? so the DQ6 had the same in the review samples too but it wasnt the case come retail.

need i go on ?

listen no one is hating this board, but the fact remains, that this board doesnt do anything new, independant ram clocking isnt that big of a deal, the performance increase on a conroe is MINIMAL when ramping your ram up high.
and unless you can keep you ram TIGHT, like 4-4-4- 1200+ mhz, or 1T at high clocks, the independant ram clocking realy doesnt improve anything.
if you know anything about conroes and have tested them you know that the performance boost of higher ram clocks is very minimal. and only shows itself as a boost in SuperPi scores. thats all. possibly 3dMark, there isnt any real world benefit.

i like this board so far, DFI is taking their time , testing the holy hell out of it, and after the 680i fiasco and NVidia's fantasy land fix, i am walking on egg shells for my next mobo purchase,,, will it be the RD600 ,,, maybe,, another better 680i.... maybe.. a 965? possibly. only time will tell. but im waiting and i urge all of you guys to do the same unless you have the money to burn or have a mommy and daddy to buy you stuff all the time, like some unnamed, self proclaimed guru's around here do, or if you get bucket loads of free hardware from the Manufacturers like every one of the guys here who posts EARLY reviews of hardware.
wait and see,,,, wait and see, dont be so eager to jump on the bandwagon just cuz its a DFI board. DFI does NOT have a history of making good Intel baords, nor do they have a history for having the best relationship with Intel either.
just dont hype yourself to the point where if this board doesnt come out and do a song and dance for you, you're all peeved.
12-22-2006, 07:00 PM
Praxis1452

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lestat

its only pointless if you believe that this is the end all motherboard for conroes... and its not.

the simple fact is that this board introduces NOTHING that hasnt alredy been done.

Independant ram clocking? been there - 680i/650i
High FSB ? where?? i dont see it??
when the RETAIL boards come out then we will see. but for now... been there done that. - DS3, DS4, DQ6, P5B, P5W, on and on and on,, need i keep listing baord that hit and exceed 500mhz FSB? at a much lower price point?
8x8x XFire ? so what there is 16x16x SLI which already outperforms XFire
and there are already XFire boards available.
0.006v Droop at 1.5v ? so the DQ6 had the same in the review samples too but it wasnt the case come retail.

need i go on ?
just dont hype yourself to the point where if this board doesnt come out and do a song and dance for you, you're all peeved.

680i wasn't true async ram tony said I believe in this thread.

511fsb is pretty high. Sure you can go higher on other boards but your going to say it's "only average" no. It's a bit above.

8x8Xfire yes. If that matters that much than buy the 16x16 680i boards. I mean remember the A8N32-SLI or whatever with 16x16 that cost a good $50 more. Yet performance was minimal in almost all games.

Where was the DQ6 getting the same amount of VDroop?

I the your last quote really only applied to you.

There's the good and the mediocre with this board in the parts that concern me. So overall it's much better than any other board yet. However I'm still angry with the vaporware because as of now that's exactly what it is.
12-22-2006, 08:50 PM
snowboarder

oh brother...

Quote:

Originally Posted by deachus

That was the most pointless post I've ever seen!! Posts like this is why there are so many pages to read through. Makes it much harder to find useful information.

I understand you have all the same options with your current motherboard. This motherboard brings all those grate options, voltages, fine tuning to CORE 2 DUO. Which outperforms your Pentium D 950 by alot. People have been waiting because they want these motherboard options for CORE 2 DUO. I believe that is what this thread is about.

and this pile of nonsense contributes how???

Thanks for shouting that this new board brings RD400's "grate" options to the C2D. I never would have known that C2D outperforms a Pentium D 950. :clap:

You should relax a bit before you get all worked up for no reason...it's just a motherboard.

SB
12-22-2006, 09:03 PM
OldGuy

Plenty of pointless posts to go around right now guys...lets wait (as if we had a choice) and see what this board brings to the table before we go lopping off each others heads...as SB just stated...it's just another motherboard. Wait till EVERYBODY get's a chance to tinker with it before coming to any conclusions.
12-22-2006, 09:03 PM
erwinz

hehehehe :D people are really all hype because of the no retail yet of this board.. :) I'm just gonna be here and wait and sit tight.. :D

remember patient is a virtue.. :D
12-22-2006, 09:14 PM
Raja@ASUS

Well said Oldguy, Let's wait until all us regular clowns get hold of the board before passing judgement. There are many boards already out that are struggling with shipments during the festive period, so mid January is a safe bet. DFI has put a lot of work into this one and I'm sure it will show. Let the dust settle at least, after which the board sells to the masses and we get to see the wider picture and any possible issues that can't be tested for in small circulation due to infinate setup variables.

I'm looking forwards to this one..

regards
raja
12-22-2006, 09:37 PM
OldGuy

Quote:

Originally Posted by raju

I'm looking forwards to this one..

regards
raja

As we all are...I've taken a nice little vacation from mobo testing and look forward to having a DFI to play with. DFI isn't the end all be all but I've been sorely disappointed with Asus and can't wait to have a "true" overclockers board to play with...Nothing I've tinkered with in the past two months has come close to Ultra D "tweakability" and familiarity...those two little tid bits alone are worth the price of entry.
12-22-2006, 11:45 PM
Poodle

Easy to say relax; for you and Raju, Oldtimer. You are both on the Infinity, which is more than nice. I've been on a cheap 945 board since summer (All the good boards were sold out and I was thinking: Hey the rd600 will be here in 2 months...:confused2 ) that generates an Xtremely high overclock of earth shattering 20Mhz FSB! :slapass:

If I had the Infinity or a Bad axe 2 or similiar high end 975X I think I would settle with it and buy the Bearlake or AM3 later on.

Ok I won't crap this thread anymore now. Waiting for the release...
12-23-2006, 06:58 AM
snowboarder

Just to clarify from my previous post above, I'm not ripping this board, calling it crap or saying that it sucks. Just pointing out my OWN personal observations. Since the RD600 is based to a good degree on the current board I have in my gaming rig, I also point out that it overclocks decently, plays ANY game I throw at it; all on high settings with ancient video cards and that it runs rock stable...everything that I have no doubt the RD600 will inherit from its predecessors.

It looks to me that the board is aimed at the uber tinkerer who wants to explore previously unexplored bios options and to see what kind of performance they can wring and tweak out of their rig. Once all the unanswered questions get figured out and the hype dies down what will be left is a good, stable gaming platform that runs native crossfire, has some bells and whistles to up performance and with a C2D at the helm...basically an ATI 975x clone.

Honestly I have no idea what I was expecting come to think of it, :slap: but with all the hype, the NDAs and the excitement from the community I guess I was expecting something over the top and to be blown away by this chipset. That I'm not feels like a partyfoul. :D

Later!!!

SB

***keep the profanity a little milder please..T
12-23-2006, 07:27 AM
screwtech02

Quote:

Originally Posted by XeRo

Here's what I found on dfi-street.

http://www.dfi-street.com/forum/show...t=71592&page=3

Man, personally, the support forums over there are enough for me to NOT even consider this board at all..... I mean wow, talk about "nice" personality's...

Banned 7 days for improper punctuation, spelling, email addys, no sig (?),or "just because"...

"I can see your papers are STILL out of order comrade...." :rolleyes:
12-23-2006, 10:15 AM
_33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lestat

its only pointless if you believe that this is the end all motherboard for conroes... and its not.

the simple fact is that this board introduces NOTHING that hasnt alredy been done.

Independant ram clocking? been there - 680i/650i
High FSB ? where?? i dont see it??
when the RETAIL boards come out then we will see. but for now... been there done that. - DS3, DS4, DQ6, P5B, P5W, on and on and on,, need i keep listing baord that hit and exceed 500mhz FSB? at a much lower price point?
8x8x XFire ? so what there is 16x16x SLI which already outperforms XFire
and there are already XFire boards available.

You can't compare this board with every board in the world, for example the DS3... The DS3 is not a standard full size board, it doesn't have firewire, it's a 3 phase power, ICH8, not even ICH8R, RAID 0, 1, JBOD ... Yes the DS4 is a little more feature rich [than the DS3].

But this new board is feature rich, and it's a tweaker board. And it's a DFI so it's made to be tweaked and should be quite stable at overclocked settings. Just throwing a bunch of other boards in and sayign, hey this board is just one against all the others is quite not what I would consider a fair trick. The only complaint I would adress is the high price. And, for that price there are other choices, but certainly not a DS3, probably not even a DS4.
12-23-2006, 10:27 AM
mnemonik23

Quote:

Originally Posted by _33

....But this new board is feature rich....

wow :D
12-23-2006, 10:43 AM
_33

Quote:

Originally Posted by mnemonik23

wow :D

If you feel like mocking my words, please first read the DFI pages about this board, and do your own study, and also read the preview on Anandtech closely.

Anandtech preview

DFI NEWS

LANPARTY UT ICFX3200-T2R/G full specs
12-23-2006, 11:30 AM
Revv23

Quote:

Originally Posted by screwtech02

Man, personally, the support forums over there are enough for me to NOT even consider this board at all..... I mean wow, talk about "nice" personality's...

Banned 7 days for improper punctuation, spelling, email addys, no sig (?),or "just because"...

"I can see your papers are STILL out of order comrade...." :rolleyes:

They have very clear and specific rules in the support forum, being a support forum they want your rig specs in your sig, and they make it clear that you wil be banned without it, its common policy. If you follow the rules you will find it a very helpful and friendly community. :)
12-23-2006, 01:23 PM
Kakulukia

Quote:

Originally Posted by _33

But this new board is feature rich, and it's a tweaker board. And it's a DFI so it's made to be tweaked and should be quite stable at overclocked settings. Just throwing a bunch of other boards in and sayign, hey this board is just one against all the others is quite not what I would consider a fair trick. The only complaint I would adress is the high price. And, for that price there are other choices, but certainly not a DS3, probably not even a DS4.

I cannot agree more.

I am really looking forward to the retail ones of this board. I ve been thinking of running crossfire/SLI. I dont want to run SLI (I 'd rather make a switch to ATi/AMD), so the only option is crossfire. Currently, there are no ''good'' boards to run Crossfire in combination with Core2duo (support).

I ve seen some compare results. And they are definetely not bad compared to x975 and 680i. Also, this board could be less expensive........
12-23-2006, 01:30 PM
Revv23

Hey tony, i was just reading through WWM's review, and according to him the FSB clockgen will go up to 566mhz.... does he just have a new version of the clockgen? or does the system manager support it and the board not?
12-23-2006, 01:40 PM
Praxis1452

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revv23

Hey tony, i was just reading through WWM's review, and according to him the FSB clockgen will go up to 566mhz.... does he just have a new version of the clockgen? or does the system manager support it and the board not?

Gary mentioned on Anandtech that in the new bios Oskar still managed to squeeze a bit more. Retail bios by next week.
12-23-2006, 01:52 PM
_33

more pretty pictures

LINK

LINK 2
12-23-2006, 02:14 PM
Enz0

Retail BIOS seems to be done.
http://us.dfi.com.tw/Support/Downloa...FLAG=B&SITE=US
12-23-2006, 02:36 PM
bingo13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revv23

Hey tony, i was just reading through WWM's review, and according to him the FSB clockgen will go up to 566mhz.... does he just have a new version of the clockgen? or does the system manager support it and the board not?

The AMD system manager allows you to go up to 566 in XP. However, our board failed at anything over 518. I think Tony made it to 520. I noticed stability went quickly down the drain starting around 512 with the 12/07 BIOS. ;)

We have a new BIOS to try this weekend that is later than the C18 on the website. The C18 cleared up several problems for us and allowed some additional memory tweaking with lower latencies past 1000. (This board loves memory speeds in the 1100~1200 range.) The C18 is far better than the 12/01 and 12/07 BIOS releases we used for the preview.
12-23-2006, 03:09 PM
RichUK

I don’t understand why DFI can’t allow upto 566FSB through the BIOS :confused:

If the PLL is able to create a frequency of 566Mhz, why can’t this be set in the BIOS aswell as within windows :S
12-23-2006, 03:34 PM
Tony

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revv23

Hey tony, i was just reading through WWM's review, and according to him the FSB clockgen will go up to 566mhz.... does he just have a new version of the clockgen? or does the system manager support it and the board not?

This is why I wanted everyone posting here, you are all now going back and forth reading and coming back to us here for support on the board.

As Gary just posted and i mentioned earlier AMD system manager will allow much higher than 511, just like the board will do a lot higher than 3V on the memory; DFI are setting workable limits though.

I have a bios here that may allow 533 or so, its under test by DFI beta testers so we can't say much yet. There has been quite a bit of testing in the background making improvements and bug fixing.

Things will slow over the holidays, we will try and post results with the new bios soon though.

T
12-23-2006, 03:35 PM
Tony

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichUK

I don’t understand why DFI can’t allow upto 566FSB through the BIOS :confused:

If the PLL is able to create a frequency of 566Mhz, why can’t this be set in the BIOS aswell as within windows :S

remember chipset clock as well as cpu clock...you can have a clockgen that will do 500+ but the chipset may max out.

There may be limits to the PLL on the clockgen also, this is why the workable limit is lower than the max shown is system manager
12-23-2006, 03:46 PM
RGone

More or less as Tony says...still testing...but what amazes me is that software can say any FSB...1,000 even if you wish to write it in the application but that certainly says nothing about whether any FSB will be actually bootable, useable or stable.

RGone...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tony

This is why I wanted everyone posting here, you are all now going back and forth reading and coming back to us here for support on the board.

As Gary just posted and i mentioned earlier AMD system manager will allow much higher than 511, just like the board will do a lot higher than 3V on the memory; DFI are setting workable limits though.

I have a bios here that may allow 533 or so, its under test by DFI beta testers so we can't say much yet. There has been quite a bit of testing in the background making improvements and bug fixing.

Things will slow over the holidays, we will try and post results with the new bios soon though.

T
12-23-2006, 04:03 PM
mnemonik23

Quote:

Originally Posted by _33

If you feel like mocking my words, please first read the DFI pages about this board, and do your own study, and also read the preview on Anandtech closely.

Anandtech preview

DFI NEWS

LANPARTY UT ICFX3200-T2R/G full specs

ok, I'm not trying to piss anybody and if I did, I want to apologies.

But I do not see how all these rich features make the RD600 a top enthusiast board? Too much hype IMHO.
12-23-2006, 04:05 PM
Nosfer@tu

I just want to se some end users have the board.

I really hope it is what it is made up to be :)
Dont like the i680 :(
12-23-2006, 04:11 PM
Nosfer@tu

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lestat

its only pointless if you believe that this is the end all motherboard for conroes... and its not.

the simple fact is that this board introduces NOTHING that hasnt alredy been done.

Independant ram clocking? been there - 680i/650i
High FSB ? where?? i dont see it??
when the RETAIL boards come out then we will see. but for now... been there done that. - DS3, DS4, DQ6, P5B, P5W, on and on and on,, need i keep listing baord that hit and exceed 500mhz FSB? at a much lower price point?
8x8x XFire ? so what there is 16x16x SLI which already outperforms XFire
and there are already XFire boards available.
0.006v Droop at 1.5v ? so the DQ6 had the same in the review samples too but it wasnt the case come retail.

need i go on ?

listen no one is hating this board, but the fact remains, that this board doesnt do anything new, independant ram clocking isnt that big of a deal, the performance increase on a conroe is MINIMAL when ramping your ram up high.
and unless you can keep you ram TIGHT, like 4-4-4- 1200+ mhz, or 1T at high clocks, the independant ram clocking realy doesnt improve anything.
if you know anything about conroes and have tested them you know that the performance boost of higher ram clocks is very minimal. and only shows itself as a boost in SuperPi scores. thats all. possibly 3dMark, there isnt any real world benefit.

i like this board so far, DFI is taking their time , testing the holy hell out of it, and after the 680i fiasco and NVidia's fantasy land fix, i am walking on egg shells for my next mobo purchase,,, will it be the RD600 ,,, maybe,, another better 680i.... maybe.. a 965? possibly. only time will tell. but im waiting and i urge all of you guys to do the same unless you have the money to burn or have a mommy and daddy to buy you stuff all the time, like some unnamed, self proclaimed guru's around here do, or if you get bucket loads of free hardware from the Manufacturers like every one of the guys here who posts EARLY reviews of hardware.
wait and see,,,, wait and see, dont be so eager to jump on the bandwagon just cuz its a DFI board. DFI does NOT have a history of making good Intel baords, nor do they have a history for having the best relationship with Intel either.
just dont hype yourself to the point where if this board doesnt come out and do a song and dance for you, you're all peeved.

I wish I had read a post like that before I bougth my current motherboard :(

How lame is it to be limmited at 400 fsb....

And a DAMM fine point you maid there sir.
12-23-2006, 04:35 PM
The Nemesis

As long as all the boards we buy from e-tailers hit 500FSB with no issue's, I still say this will be the tweaker's board. I wanted to have one by now, but if DFI wants to delay to insure a working product with as few bugs & problems as possible, I can wait a few more weeks. Consider this, only the 965 chipset based motherboards seem to hit 500FSB consistently, with the trade off being performance vs 975 chipsets. The RD600 IMO has a lot going for it when you consider 500FSB with better performance than 965 chipset, low power consumption, and that tricked out bios. The 680i is a power hog, the chipset get extremely hot, its hit or miss hitting 500FSB (FSB holes), & extremely buggy (ps2 mouse & keyboard freezes & sata data corruption or loss). I don't recall these issue's being reported before the board was available.

I'm looking forward to owning and tinkering with this board. I've already gotten rid of my EVGA 680i to make room for it.:)
12-23-2006, 04:46 PM
Raja@ASUS

I think the issue will be be how consistently this board manages to hit those clocks. That's the variable we have seen on most other boards to date.

Most of the hype comes from the excitment of the users, some are ecstatic others have unrealistic expectations. Most of us including myself fill both.

Anything you see on the advertisiing front is the same we see on every motherboard, it's just this one has way more interest.

Bottom line of what I see is that people wanna buy a e6400 and overclock it to 4ghz, so the board must hit crazy high fsb's.

So now if a motherboard manufacturer can't provide that they're no good?

I'm afraid I tend to disagree, Intel were clever enough to lock those multipliers down for a reason, that's how the price range exists. Granted the difference we're talking about is an anal 100-200mhz or so? That's certainly true for the most part, less people run phase than those running water or air.

Best bang for buck for the more advanced mid range oc'ers is still the E6600, if you must get the extra 100mhz or so oc over the 2mb cache cores. That's a generalistaion not a hard and fast rule.

The rub is how stable that 511 is, if it can run unconditional at that fsb for 90% of users who have similar cooling and hardware config, that's will be a victory in itself.

The lanperty range has always been for tweakers and for the most part when DFI get it right, the boards ususally are more consistent clockers than any other. The rest is down to learnng curve..

Sometimes I wonder who really benefits from these threads as they seem to give all parties involved a hard time.

If the concern is really about spin, then we won't know the truth until we have the boards ourselves.

Best thing to do with a thread like this is to lock it so only those who have the board can post and make it reader only for the rest of us, might not keep people happy but that way we can keep our supreme intelligence to ourselves(me too)...

2-3 weeks from now the truth will be out anyway, I don't think anyone feels they'll drop a big bucket of donkey sh** on us all and then hide behind a lampost..

regards
Raja
12-23-2006, 05:50 PM
Tony

Guys

All I see is people annoyed the board will only do 500fsb or so; all you have to do is buy clever with the cpu and your fsb issue is over.

Im testing badaxe2 at the moment, I have found a way of lowering memory latency by 4 to 7ns in everest, but doing so limits workable fsb on the board to 340 with a Conroe, maybe 345 with an Allendale. Now, couple this up with a 6800 running 12 multi and you are sat sweet at 4ghz or so and the ram is barely doing ddr900 with the performance of 1100+.

RD600 needs cpu's with higher multipliers, i think we all know that, but what you keep forgetting is you can pretty much dial the memory in at any speed you want. This alone makes this board quite a bit more flexible than the badaxe which is stuck with 1:1 or 3:4 etc etc for ram ratio's.

I firmly believe Allendales are built for 965 boards, Conroes are built for something thats that little bit faster like the 975 or the RD600 etc, but you are going to have to see 500fsb+ is pretty hard with a Conroe for any board.

I think it all boils down to how much hard cash you are willing to throw at your overclock on the CPU, if its sub $200 you really do need to look at 965 if you want to push 550FSB, If like me you need a little more horse power you need Conroe with that higher multiplier to get you there.
12-23-2006, 06:41 PM
Tallman

Has anyone done any testing with a 6700 retail yet?
If so, I would like to see some results as that is the chip I have.
I am also running ddr2-1000 modules with the D9's in them. D9GMK I think.
12-23-2006, 07:08 PM
erwinz

well said Sir Tony.. :)

OT: Merry Christmas :)
12-23-2006, 07:19 PM
Phosphate

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tony

After waiting 6 months DFI bring us the first official RD600 based motherboard for Intels C2D CPU's.

Contributions from myself, bingo13, and Rgone during first beta testing of the board.

I posted some initial bios shots in the link below.

Preview review over at Anandtech by Gary Key here

500fsb first shots

Check here for the latest pics

One thing that bothers me about this board is the dual 8x PCI-E lanes when in Crossfire. Didn't AMD eventually get dual 16x lanes working on their last crossfire board?
12-23-2006, 07:23 PM
Phosphate

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tony

Guys

I think it all boils down to how much hard cash you are willing to throw at your overclock on the CPU, if its sub $200 you really do need to look at 965 if you want to push 550FSB, If like me you need a little more horse power you need Conroe with that higher multiplier to get you there.

Yep that is the classic tradeoff: Higher multipler gets you tighter timings and less latency all things equal. That being said it will be interesting to see how the E4300 (9x multi) and E4400 (10x multi) play with these boards.
12-23-2006, 09:12 PM
bingo13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phosphate

Yep that is the classic tradeoff: Higher multipler gets you tighter timings and less latency all things equal. That being said it will be interesting to see how the E4300 (9x multi) and E4400 (10x multi) play with these boards.

I am running the E4300 at 3.3 on this board without an issue. CPU is at 1.4250V currently. Kentsfield is in it now. ;)
12-23-2006, 11:28 PM
Raja@ASUS

precisley my point all this spin has been created off the other boards namely the 965 variants, where people have posted some oc's of allendale up near 4ghz and now everyone wants buy cheap and get that performance and the mobo makers are bearing the brunt of the infinate fsb search.

E6600 is fine air and water upwards on 975. Even 980i's will work best with the x6800/E6700 as you remain under the strap changes for performance on air and water, if you can afford better cooling you should be looking better cpu too. I am not convinced that superpi times play any major part while I am playing 3d games, I get bemused when boards are asked to purely sell or be of merit based upon a single super pi run. The bigger market is definatley with the 3d gamers than the benchers and bingo laid out the percentage's for us all before. I should think that XS makes up a small percentage of the hits at anandtech reviews, the rest are gamers and other enthusiats thay have little concern for the ultimate 600fsb board, 511fsb is a god send to us all if it's stable for the majority.

There has been just too much spin of fsb in the industry, and I'm hoping that threads like these at least serve to bring some of us home for a reality check.
12-24-2006, 01:26 AM
Phosphate

Quote:

Originally Posted by raju

precisley my point all this spin has been created off the other boards namely the 965 variants, where people have posted some oc's of allendale up near 4ghz and now everyone wants buy cheap and get that performance and the mobo makers are bearing the brunt of the infinate fsb search.

I know what you are saying about the high FSB for the allendale guys, but what I want to know is how much a said mobo can improve the total frequency potential of a CPU. I think Northbridge temps may play into that among other things (chipset timings etc). Haha, I'm no Expert.

Whenever I see a review of a Mobo and the guy puts it on the 6x multiplier and gets 550 FSB....I say to myself so what?:D That's only 3.3 Ghz
12-24-2006, 05:59 AM
Raja@ASUS

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phosphate

I know what you are saying about the high FSB for the allendale guys, but what I want to know is how much a said mobo can improve the total frequency potential of a CPU. I think Northbridge temps may play into that among other things (chipset timings etc). Haha, I'm no Expert.

I think it's time we began to acknowledge that current engineering capabilities at this price point allow a max fsb and performance that has some give and take accross all the current chipsets.

I have toyed with high frequency audio amps and psu's, and I can tell you this, that designers have to go to massive lengths to keep things stable at high mhz, oscillation is a killer at high mhz especially in a electrically noisy environment like a pc case with loads of psu rails all over the place. Trace inductance, ground planes, emi/rmi shielding the list goes on. Multi layer pcbs are a must, but that raises costs too, so we need a middle ground between both. An alternative to conventional glass fibre pcbs is available - Teflon pcb, but the cost would be astronomical.

People complain about hook n loop nb sinks but they have no idea why those loops are really used, study the pcb closly and in general you'll find that traces are run in the space that loops save over holes, Intel did it for a reason with the 975 and other chipsets have followed suit because it works better at the design level. The highest fsb strains are on the nb/ram/cpu connection, any savings there in terms of space and trace routing give the engineer a far easier time getting those crucial mhz that we all want.

R&D work is required behind the scene to take the mhz battle to the next level in terms of the upcoming nbridges that we don't yet know about, and thats gonna take time, question is how patient are we, and how much are we willing to pay if we are to get it right now?

Profit margins for ground breaking products are not always as high as we are lead to believe based upon immediate perception of individual component costs at pcb level.

regards
Raja
12-24-2006, 06:19 AM
The Stilt

How high fsb have you guys reached when memory is running in sync mode?

The board / bios seem to have certain problems with sync mode.
Before finding the fix my board could do only 420FSB in sync mode.

The board I´m using is not a retail sample, just one of the release candidate revisions.

This board has a revision A13 NB, which is already fully functional revision so the sync mode problem should´t be NB related.
12-24-2006, 07:06 AM
s e t h

what fix was needed for sync mode clocking above 420fsb The Stilt?
12-24-2006, 07:36 AM
eva2000
Merry Xmas guys :)

Not much to see I know... but I spent the whole day just playing around in memtest86+ v1.65 with 2x512MB OCZ PC5400 Platinum XTC 3-3-3-12 to figure stuff out as there's so many bios voltages and settings to figure out. Once I got a comfortable and stable memtest86+ v1.65 config, I installed windows and proceeded to do some stock speed load tests to compare temperature readings with my E6600 air vs water results shown here.

System:
- E6600 QPGE B1 Step
- Tuniq Tower 120 with stock fan (High speed)
- DFI ICFX3200-T2R/G 12/23 beta bios
- 512MB HIS X1800XT + VF900CU
- 2x512MB OCZ PC5400 Platinum XTC 3-3-3-12
- 74GB WD Raptor 8MB
- Pioneer DVD Burner
- 1.44MB FDD
- 1KW PCP&C SLI psu
- WinXP Pro SP2
- SB600 Catalyst 6.11 Chipset driver build 37616
System pics in sig linky ;)

Under Load Digitech QM1538 Digital Multimeter measured psu rails as follows:

Rail = Smartguardian = DMM real
+12v rail = 12.09v = 12.26v
+5v rail = 4.89v = 5.10v
+3.3v rail = 3.28v = 3.368v

DFI ICFX3200-T2R/G 12/23 beta bios settings used:
(additions since 12/18 bios in bold)

Quote:

Memory Clock Frequency: Sync
Current Memory Clock: 266

Control CPU Frequency: Enabled
x CPU Frequency (Mhz): 267
NB FSB Strapping: AUTO
PCI-E Overclock: 100
Software Reset Clockgen: Disabled
Memory Overclocking: Disabled

CPU Vid Control: 1.25v
CPU VID Special ADD:
DDR2 Ram 1.8 Voltage: 2.15v
CPU VTT 1.2V Voltage: 1.31
NB Core 1.2V Voltage: 1.36v
NB PLL 1.8V Voltage: 1.83v
NB PLL 1.2V Voltage: 1.38v
NB PCI-E 1.2V Voltage: 1.34v
NB Core 1.2V convert from: 1.89v
SB Core 1.2V Voltage: 1.34v
Clockgen Voltage: 2.92v
GTL REF Voltage control: Enabled
CPU Core 1/2 GTL REF Volt: 48
North Bridge GTL REF Volt: 48
CPU PLL Setting Overide: 128
PLL Override loop count: Enabled
Conroe P-State Multiplier: x9
C1E Function: Disabled

CS Output Timing: Delay 1/4 clock
CK Output Timing: AUTO
Dual channel Split Mode: AUTO
ADDR/CMD Driving Pre-AMP: Enabled
ADDR/CMD Driving Strength: 15
Clocking Driving Pre-AMP: Always
Clocking Driving Strength: 5
Address/Command Timing: 1T
Memory Timing Select: Manual

CAS Timing (TCAS): 3
Read RAS-CAS Delay (TRCDR): 3
Write RAS-CAS Delay (TRCDW): 3
RAS Precharge Time (TRP): 3
Cycle Time (TRAS): 8

Row Cycle Time (TRC): 18
Refresh to Active (TRFC): 35
Bank to Bank CMD (TRRD): 3
Write Recovery (TWR): 5

Read-Write Command (TRTW): 3
Write-Write CS (TWTW_CS): 2
Write-Read Command (TWTR): 3
Write-Read CS (TWTR_CS): 2
Read-Read CS (TRTR_CS): 2
Read Data Transfers: 5

Memory Auto-Calibration
Read Data Transfer: Enabled
Read Strobe Delay: Disabled
Read Strobe Arrival: Enabled

http://fileshosts.com/intel/DFI/ICFX..._validated.png

CPU Idle:
http://fileshosts.com/intel/DFI/ICFX.../cpuz_idle.png

CPU Load:
http://fileshosts.com/intel/DFI/ICFX...ime95_load.png

CPU Post Load Idle:
http://fileshosts.com/intel/DFI/ICFX...tload_idle.png

Quote:

E6600 @2400Mhz at 1.23v
DFI ICFX3200-T2R/G

Tuniq Tower 120 with stock fan (High speed)

Room temp: ~28.2-30.8C
Cooling used: Tuniq Tower 120 with stock fan (High speed)
Bios idle: 43-48C
Windows idle: 37-40C
Windows load: 50-51C with fluctuations in coretemp down to 48C
Rise above ambient delta = 19.2-22.8C
Rise above windows idle delta = 10-14C

The DFI ICFX3200-T2R/G seems to have a higher idle temp than my experiences on Asus P5W DH Deluxe, Asus P5B Deluxe, Asus 680i Striker Extreme and Intel D975XBX Badaxe. All other boards were also tested with Intel Speedstep and C1E disabled like DFI ICFX3200-T2R/G. But load temps are on par for air cooling. Rise above ambient delta temps seem to agree with my E6600 air vs water cooling tests with Intel D975XBX http://i4memory.com/showthread.php?t=3218 although at a lower vcore than on Intel D975XBX Badaxe :)

Quote:

E6600 @2400Mhz at 1.259v
Intel D975XBX Badaxe

Scythe Infinity + 2x Thermaltake 120x25mm 81cfm push-pull

Room temp: ~27-29C
Cooling used: Scythe Infinity + 2x Thermaltake 120x25mm 81cfm push-pull
Bios idle: 40-43C
Windows idle: 35-36C
Windows load: 50-51C
Rise above ambient delta = 22-24C
Rise above windows idle delta = 15-16C

Guys just be aware that there's ALOT of settings to test and it takes time... I've only had the board up and running for less than 24hrs so far and haven't tested alot of stuff still
12-24-2006, 07:42 AM
The Stilt

Quote:

Originally Posted by flytek

what fix was needed for sync mode clocking above 420fsb The Stilt?

Just a simple bios trick that had to be done on the reference RS600/RD600 boards too.

I want to hear other experiences before telling more.
Just in case the problem is related to this specific board.

The board works now atleast up to 480FSB in sync mode.
12-24-2006, 07:44 AM
eva2000

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Stilt

Just a simple bios trick that had to be done on the reference RS600/RD600 boards too.

I want to hear other experiences before telling more.
Just in case the problem is related to this specific board.

The board works now atleast up to 480FSB in sync mode.

what bios you on ?
12-24-2006, 07:48 AM
The Stilt

Quote:

Originally Posted by eva2000

what bios you on ?

12/18.
Got pm btw ;)
12-24-2006, 08:27 AM
bingo13

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Stilt

How high fsb have you guys reached when memory is running in sync mode?

The board / bios seem to have certain problems with sync mode.
Before finding the fix my board could do only 420FSB in sync mode.

The board I´m using is not a retail sample, just one of the release candidate revisions.

This board has a revision A13 NB, which is already fully functional revision so the sync mode problem should´t be NB related.

I could not get over 416 in sync mode until this last BIOS (12/23) update. I am at 476 stable now, almost hit 500 but stability was an issue. I played with the new BIOS settings for a few hours last night and realized since the 12/07 BIOS that about 40% of my original settings need fine tuning again. :D I was unable to run higher than 7x506 with the E6600 on this BIOS (12/23), was easily hitting 7x511 stable before. I also dropped from 9x432 down to 9x426 but I was able to drop VCore from 1.5375V down to 1.5000V in the process (yes, my E6600 is not a good sample). However, a few benchmarks have improved a couple of percent so far with BF2 coming up a couple of frames but HL2 dropping a couple. Even so, this board will not be a benchmark record holder but I still like it. :clap:

EVA-
My Northbridge temps peak around 58C under load with the stock heatsink after removing the pad and using a little less paste than DFI placed on it. I was up around 61C completely stock, throwing some addtional air across it dropped my temps down to 52C now. RGone found that adding a small heatsink to the clockgen will also help. I plan on trying it today along with a modded SwiftTech cooler for the Northbridge.

I also found that depending upon whether I want to run 1T between 800~900 or run 1200 at 4-4-4 timings that the board is very sensitive still to the memory module I use. I will PM you later today with my working list to date after some additional testing.
12-24-2006, 09:13 AM
_33

I'm quite skeptical about wether DFI will leave this board all passive cooling. I mean even the LP NF4 boards have active cooling. I would really look forward to an active cooling on the chipset, and maybe some extra heat sinks where it counts most. I believe it makes sense for this tweaker board to have that sort of help instead of giving that extra hassle to the buyer :confused: , specially considering this isn't a value product.

I still own a LP NF4 UT board and am looking seriously into switching C2D + ICFX3200 in the near future, as it is starting to make some sense. Also I am wondering if there will be any derivatives of this board? An Expert or Venus model?

Anyhow, this is getting interesting none the less! :p: :clap:
12-24-2006, 09:15 AM
marauder16

Quote:

RGone found that adding a small heatsink to the clockgen will also help. I plan on trying it today along with a modded SwiftTech cooler for the Northbridge.

Sorry for my noobness but which IC is the Clockgen IC?
12-24-2006, 09:29 AM
bingo13

Quote:

Originally Posted by raju

There has been just too much spin of fsb in the industry, and I'm hoping that threads like these at least serve to bring some of us home for a reality check.

I agree completely. People need to understand what you are giving up to get those few extra FSB. While it is nice that I have a couple of ASUS boards that do 520FSB with the E6300, I would much rather have an E6600/6700 on a good 975X board at 415~420FSB. Our discussions with the motherboard suppliers center around stability and peak performance at given FSB points and not on producing a board with the highest FSB in order to grab headlines. It just seems as if everyone has gotten into the FSB race and decided to ignore actual performance or stability for the sake of a good SuperPI or CPU-Z screenshot. Unfortunately, unless you show this capability people will say the board sucks.

The people complaining about the FSB limit on this board should realize at this time the board is more stable at its upper limits in actual use than any other non-Intel chipset (better than most of those) board available. While it does not provide the best performance in benchmarks, it does give the user great flexibility with their component choices.

In the end, not a single one of us would be able to tell the difference between this boards performance or the 680i/650i/965/975X without a benchmark in day to day operation. What matters is stability, features, support, warranty, and price in my opinion. I would just assume to throw out most of the bencmarks and look at overall platform stability at given FSB/Memory settings. For the benchmarks left, they should be compared on a clock by clock basis between chipsets. A wider audience might start to fully realize that you need that additional 35~50FSB on a 965 board above 400FSB to make up for performance losses due to memory strap changes as an example.

I would be a lot happier to have a stable P965 system at 390FSB than 450FSB any day due to the memory/mch timing improvements. When the first P965 boards were introduced, the suppliers were working towards that goal as they knew the best performance of the chipset at a reasonable cost was to get into the 385FSB range in a stable manner, people started complaining about not having high FSBs once they realized the overclocking headroom in the Core 2 Duos, so now we get 450FSB on average but did performance really improve that much? The new target for any "decent" P965 board is 500FSB and with it we get higher board costs, less stability overall, and lower performance at stock or near stock speeds just to name a few issues.

The problem is we expect our components to achieve at least a 50% improvement in speed without question. It is now expected this capability will be provided to us at no cost. Do we expect this from the automobile manufacturers? We pay extra for that level of performance. While I believe asking $1000 for a CPU or $400 for a desktop motherboard is way overboard the majority of time, I think it is wrong to expect, now demand, that same level of performance from a $150 CPU or $65 motherboard. Rant over... :D
12-24-2006, 09:39 AM
OldGuy

Very worthwhile rant Bingo...and realisticly not even a rant but pointing out what people need to realize. Will they? Of course not. Gimme gimme gimme more FSB!!! My FSB is higher than your FSB so therefore you are a noob and I am superior :D All the while the guy with the budget rig just fragged yer ass repeatedly in your favorite online game ;)
12-24-2006, 09:52 AM
MsB

I don't think I have ever seen a company reach out thru reps and involve the overclocking comunity in the release of a mobo like this I think that DFI's commitment to the OCing community and allowing its input to a product alone, deserves to be accounted for in my decision to buy this board. Besides that IT IS pretty feature rich, beautiful, and I know after all this work being done when I am able to get mY hands on one of these baby's I should get a remarkably stable high OCable unit I will enjoy a lot. Worth the extra wait. Not to mention if I hit any snags I can go to the street and get great support. Emo Boys complaining so much bugs me. Keep up the great work Guys!
12-24-2006, 10:26 AM
Raja@ASUS

Quote:

Originally Posted by bingo13

I agree completely. People need to understand what you are giving up to get those few extra FSB. While it is nice that I have a couple of ASUS boards that do 520FSB with the E6300, I would much rather have an E6600/6700 on a good 975X board at 415~420FSB. Our discussions with the motherboard suppliers center around stability and peak performance at given FSB points and not on producing a board with the highest FSB in order to grab headlines. It just seems as if everyone has gotten into the FSB race and decided to ignore actual performance or stability for the sake of a good SuperPI or CPU-Z screenshot. Unfortunately, unless you show this capability people will say the board sucks.

The people complaining about the FSB limit on this board should realize at this time the board is more stable at its upper limits in actual use than any other non-Intel chipset (better than most of those) board available. While it does not provide the best performance in benchmarks, it does give the user great flexibility with their component choices.

In the end, not a single one of us would be able to tell the difference between this boards performance or the 680i/650i/965/975X without a benchmark in day to day operation. What matters is stability, features, support, warranty, and price in my opinion. I would just assume to throw out most of the bencmarks and look at overall platform stability at given FSB/Memory settings. For the benchmarks left, they should be compared on a clock by clock basis between chipsets. A wider audience might start to fully realize that you need that additional 35~50FSB on a 965 board above 400FSB to make up for performance losses due to memory strap changes as an example.

I would be a lot happier to have a stable P965 system at 390FSB than 450FSB any day due to the memory/mch timing improvements. When the first P965 boards were introduced, the suppliers were working towards that goal as they knew the best performance of the chipset at a reasonable cost was to get into the 385FSB range in a stable manner, people started complaining about not having high FSBs once they realized the overclocking headroom in the Core 2 Duos, so now we get 450FSB on average but did performance really improve that much? The new target for any "decent" P965 board is 500FSB and with it we get higher board costs, less stability overall, and lower performance at stock or near stock speeds just to name a few issues.

The problem is we expect our components to achieve at least a 50% improvement in speed without question. It is now expected this capability will be provided to us at no cost. Do we expect this from the automobile manufacturers? We pay extra for that level of performance. While I believe asking $1000 for a CPU or $400 for a desktop motherboard is way overboard the majority of time, I think it is wrong to expect, now demand, that same level of performance from a $150 CPU or $65 motherboard. Rant over... :D

Those are the sorts of posts we all need. It's a shame that so much ground work has to be done before we see them. I still hold my stance that tight moderation is needed with strong teams and a set place of test criteria.
Threads need to be either locked or have expected time frames for the next round of data and the content of data to be expected. Bios settings need to be made clear as do whether or not review peripherals are purchased retail or review supply.

Those are the only previews/reviews that should be presented period.

I like the fact that eva2000 has taken the initiative and posted bios screenhots with settings. Screenshots of the board at every angle and a single bench mean nothing to me anymore and I'm not the only one I can assure you, all it does is serve to lead people on an assumption path which does no-one any good long term. Least of all the better users that go round helping people out afterwards with setting tips.

Next comes glitches bios fixes, tricks tweaks and incompatibility issues, to any extent that they're possible.

regards
raja
12-24-2006, 10:41 AM
p0tter

Quote:

Originally Posted by _33

I'm quite skeptical about wether DFI will leave this board all passive cooling. I mean even the LP NF4 boards have active cooling. I would really look forward to an active cooling on the chipset, and maybe some extra heat sinks where it counts most. I believe it makes sense for this tweaker board to have that sort of help instead of giving that extra hassle to the buyer :confused: , specially considering this isn't a value product.

Because its a lose lose situation,

NF2 and NF3 = passive and everyone btchd

NF4 and CFX = active and everyone btchd because it was too loud.

I perfer stock being passive since I am going to swap it out anyways.
12-24-2006, 11:01 AM
RichUK

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldGuy

Very worthwhile rant Bingo...and realisticly not even a rant but pointing out what people need to realize. Will they? Of course not. Gimme gimme gimme more FSB!!! My FSB is higher than your FSB so therefore you are a noob and I am superior :D All the while the guy with the budget rig just fragged yer ass repeatedly in your favorite online game ;)

You seem a bit confused about the FSB argument.

Do you actually understand why certain people look for high FSB capable boards?
12-24-2006, 11:04 AM
OldGuy

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichUK

You seem a bit confused about the FSB argument.

Do you actually understand why certain people look for high FSB capable boards?

No confusion on my part bud...just tired of seeing it be the end all be all of how a motherboard is measured.
12-24-2006, 11:04 AM
Raja@ASUS

I think the point is (oldguy's) unrealistic expectations...
12-24-2006, 11:13 AM
The Stilt

Same limitation with bios 12/23.
The board maxes out at 420FSB and this time even the trick doesn´t work.

Guess its just this board.
12-24-2006, 11:48 AM
mnemonik23

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Stilt

Same limitation with bios 12/23.
The board maxes out at 420FSB and this time even the trick doesn´t work.

Guess its just this board.

I guess 511 FSB wont be the case for everybody after all... :rolleyes:

Stilt, maybe it's your CPU?
12-24-2006, 11:48 AM
Revv23

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Stilt

Same limitation with bios 12/23.
The board maxes out at 420FSB and this time even the trick doesn´t work.

Guess its just this board.

Hey stilt, why would someone want to clock in sync? Better performance?
12-24-2006, 11:59 AM
Raja@ASUS

Quote:

Originally Posted by mnemonik23

I guess 511 FSB wont be the case for everybody after all... :rolleyes:

Stilt, maybe it's your CPU?

depends what he's running I guess. E6300?

no point i can see if there's any strap changes in lowering your multi on any of the 4mb cache chips.
12-24-2006, 12:16 PM
Raja@ASUS

from the bios screens posted by eva200 I take it NB core voltage convert from is actual control of pre nb core voltage regulation circuitry for the nb? That's a very fine detail of control for all us setting freaks. You guys get any more stbility setting that higher? There should be a gap between nbcore and that setting by at least .5v I reckon (if it's the voltage control that is) as most regulation circuitry has a minimum input to output regulation requirement.

Interesting Oskar went that far, the tweaks seem endless..

regards
Raja
12-24-2006, 12:21 PM
The Stilt

Quote:

Originally Posted by mnemonik23

I guess 511 FSB wont be the case for everybody after all... :rolleyes:

Stilt, maybe it's your CPU?

Like I said before, this board is a release candidate not a final revision.
Neither the board or chipset.
12-24-2006, 12:22 PM
The Stilt

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revv23

Hey stilt, why would someone want to clock in sync? Better performance?

In some cases sync mode is performing better, yes.
12-24-2006, 01:52 PM
_33

Quote:

Originally Posted by wangerin

Because its a lose lose situation,

NF2 and NF3 = passive and everyone btchd

NF4 and CFX = active and everyone btchd because it was too loud.

I perfer stock being passive since I am going to swap it out anyways.

You know w, I figured; "Hey, it's christmas eve, let's make some VIP requests for once and see wether DFI takes note!" One way or the other... Don't need any WIFI antenna thoe :rotf: !

Bah, concerning noise, really... I still have an 80GB Hdd in there right now and let me tell you it obliterates that small chipset fan no matter what speed! Not to mention my PSU which is a class B... Nyhow, :toast2:
12-24-2006, 03:00 PM
Praxis1452

full Vr-zone review is up. not sure what bios he is using.
12-24-2006, 03:36 PM
The Nemesis

Quote:

Originally Posted by Praxis1452

full Vr-zone review is up. not sure what bios he is using.

Link to the review.
12-24-2006, 05:41 PM
eva2000

Quote:

Originally Posted by raju

from the bios screens posted by eva200 I take it NB core voltage convert from is actual control of pre nb core voltage regulation circuitry for the nb? That's a very fine detail of control for all us setting freaks. You guys get any more stbility setting that higher? There should be a gap between nbcore and that setting by at least .5v I reckon (if it's the voltage control that is) as most regulation circuitry has a minimum input to output regulation requirement.

Interesting Oskar went that far, the tweaks seem endless..

regards
Raja

Straight from http://www.thetechrepository.com/showthread.php?t=76

Quote:

NB core 1.2V convert from This controls the voltage the 1.2V NB core voltage is stepped down from. As you rais the NB1.2V you should raise the Convert from voltage for max efficiency. 2.14V is my sweet spot
12-24-2006, 05:42 PM
sierra_bound

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Nemesis

Link to the review.

Yikes, look at that NB temp.

http://resources.vr-zone.com/Shamino/dfird600er/97.jpg

"Chipset temperature makes a lot of difference for your overclocking, without the fan blowing and chipset at 104C, the FSB wouldn't even go 475MHz stable. With the fan lowering temperature to 70+C, I could then go to 495MHz FSB stable. I guess it should go higher with a water-cooled chipset, or even a chilled chipset."
12-24-2006, 06:11 PM
The Nemesis

@sierra_bound
Yes, it would seem the stock cooling is insufficient for high FSB clocking.
What's most surprising about the review is the board's overall performance ranking compared to other chipsets.
12-24-2006, 06:15 PM
sierra_bound

He's right about 965 and Kentsfield. My P5B Dlx does 450+ FSB easily with a quad core. 385FSB is good, but not good enough unless you have the fully-unlocked QX6700.

Will be interesting to see more results from users here.
12-24-2006, 06:20 PM
eva2000
Quote:

Originally Posted by sierra_bound

Yikes, look at that NB temp.

http://resources.vr-zone.com/Shamino/dfird600er/97.jpg

"Chipset temperature makes a lot of difference for your overclocking, without the fan blowing and chipset at 104C, the FSB wouldn't even go 475MHz stable. With the fan lowering temperature to 70+C, I could then go to 495MHz FSB stable. I guess it should go higher with a water-cooled chipset, or even a chilled chipset."

haven't read his review yet so not sure how much NB volts he has shoved in.. but yes you need active cooling on NB.. even a small fan would help

DFI ICFX3200-T2R/G RD600 Additional cooling
- Northbridge Chipset & ICS Clock generator
The Northbridge chipset is passively cooled and can get up to 55C according to Smartguardian under load near default volts/clocks. As with most Intel based chipsets, raising NB voltage allows a higher FSB clock. But raising NB voltage will increase the heat load for NB chipset heatsink, so even the simple acts of re-applying the thermal paste under the NB heatsink and adding a small fan over the passive NB heatsink will give you cooler temps (too early to tell from testing if it equals higher FSB max yet).
- I had to uninstall Tuniq Tower 120 heatsink to get the passive NB heatsink's hook clips nearest to cpu socket to unhook.
- I removed the white foam spacer piece attached to bottom of passive NB heatsink
- Then cleaned off the grey thermal paste used on the NB heatsink
- Reapplied Ceramique thermal paste on chipset core and reinstalled NB heatsink.
- Added 60x25mm Sunon 23.5cfm MagLev fan over passive NB heatsink. This dropped chipset load temps by ~10C under load.
- Added a Swiftech MC14 copper ram sink to the ICS clock generator as apparently this may allow you to clock higher - I haven't done enough tests to confirm if this is true. But additional cooling never hurt anyone :)
The RD600 chipset itself:
http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/mot..._RD600_004.jpg

The ICS Clock generator chip:
http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/mot..._RD600_005.jpg

The Swiftech MC14 copper ram sink with fins spread out using pliers:
http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/mot..._RD600_006.jpg
http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/mot..._RD600_008.jpg
12-24-2006, 06:35 PM
The Nemesis

@eva2000
Shamino's voltages:
http://resources.vr-zone.com/Shamino/dfird600er/95.jpg
12-24-2006, 07:04 PM
eva2000

2.31v NB PLL 1.8v :eek: trust Shamino to shove that much volts down a new board :)
12-24-2006, 07:21 PM
qdemn7

Quote:

Originally Posted by eva2000

DFI ICFX3200-T2R/G RD600 Additional cooling

eva2000 could you tell me what is the center hole to center hole distance on the 'sink on the Mosfet, and the length of 'sink itself? Thanks.
12-24-2006, 07:27 PM
Ten

well i think i stick with my DFI 975x board for now. To bad that both 680i and rd600 is not that "golden card" atm that i want. But i hope one of them will be better later on. 104c on n-b is to hot for me even it i will never run my cpu in 500+ fsb, i was hoping that rd600 was a cooler chipset than it turned out to be:hm:
12-24-2006, 07:30 PM
The Nemesis

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ten

well i think i stick with my DFI 975x board for now. To bad that both 680i and rd600 is not that "golden card" atm that i want. But i hope one of them will be better later on. 104c on n-b is to hot for me even it i will never run my cpu in 500+ fsb, i was hoping that rd600 was a cooler chipset than it turned out to be:hm:

The RD600 is cool & very efficient @ stock. The 104' was while overvolting using stock cooling. The same overvolt with some airflow was 70'c.
12-24-2006, 07:36 PM
Ten

yes i know 2.06v on n-b and 104c stock cooled but 70c default volt, and ~70c with delta fan on it (oc)so i think it's runs to hot for me anyway.
12-24-2006, 07:37 PM
Raja@ASUS

Quote:

Originally Posted by eva2000

Straight from http://www.thetechrepository.com/showthread.php?t=76

thx eva, that confirms there should at least be a gap betweeen the 2, that should be maintained as you raise nb core. Setting these 2 too close will give the core regs a hard time.

regards
Raja
12-24-2006, 07:37 PM
nealh

All I want from RD600 is a 400 fsb..maybe 450
I want a stable platform with as little vdroop as possible, cooler chipset and good memory utlization

I realize many want high fsb for extreme overclocking and hope this boards meets your needs

But I need a stable platform to try and reach 3400-3600 at as lower a vcore, chipst volt, mch voltage, vdimm as possible

BTW anyone use 10th anniver. crucial ram with this board???

From what I am seeing..the higher fsb more voltages increases that are needed..thus more heat and more issues with stablity...I wont ask if it worth it..becasue I know it is to everyone here...

Just not me anymore ..I want a good overclock, cool and stable..with as little noise as possible
12-24-2006, 07:48 PM
eva2000

Quote:

Originally Posted by raju

thx eva, that confirms there should at least be a gap betweeen the 2, that should be maintained as you raise nb core. Setting these 2 too close will give the core regs a hard time.

regards
Raja

Maybe that's what stopped Shamino from going higher http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=876 ?

qdemn7, can't measure it right now as Tuniq 120 heatsink and 8pin psu connector get in the way for the ruler heh

rough guide on mosfet heatsink hole to hole would be 6-6.2cm
12-24-2006, 07:56 PM
Raja@ASUS

It is possible indeed, though Shamino usually knows best.

If it were linear regulators we are dealing with (which it is not), the nb core would fail to function with the same output voltage as input, as the regs would dropout.

edit: In fact thinking about it wht would happen is that the actual vnb would decrease a margin below what is set for the pre reg control, ie 2.06 in from step down voltage would not equal 2.06 actual out from core reg's ...

It is possible that the nbcore convert from is a reference voltage, even still having a gap is sensible, mostly a ratio between the 2 based upon the used circuitry (once again that'll be ascertained by trial and error that'll come from lots of hard work)...

It could be that the overall effect is not really noticeable depending upon how that control is configured in the bios code (actual vs set outputs). Some of these settings just make us happy. Lots to tinker with anyway, I feel it'll be a long time before people get truly every last mhz from this board..

regards
Raja
12-24-2006, 08:07 PM
qdemn7

Quote:

Originally Posted by eva2000

qdemn7, can't measure it right now as Tuniq 120 heatsink and 8pin psu connector get in the way for the ruler heh

rough guide on mosfet heatsink hole to hole would be 6-6.2cm

Thanks, I appreciate you trying.
12-24-2006, 10:30 PM
Revv23

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Stilt

In some cases sync mode is performing better, yes.

Hey stilt, thanks for the answer, if possible, can you say if 450fsb 1:1 is better performance or would it be better async at 1200?

I'm only asking is 450fsb is my personal sweet spot, so im trying to figure out which would be better...

as you said 420fsb is max in sync, so maybe 420 sync compared to 570async if possible?

Thanks again! :)
12-25-2006, 12:00 AM
Poodle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ten

yes i know 2.06v on n-b and 104c stock cooled but 70c default volt, and ~70c with delta fan on it (oc)so i think it's runs to hot for me anyway.

:confused: On load Rd600 is the coolest high end chipset for C2D. Temps don't say anything (the diode don't always tell the whole truth). You have to look at power consumption. And this chart says the Rd600 is 30W cooler than the 975X. http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2891&p=6

I'm gonna put a Hr-05 on that NB anyway.
12-25-2006, 12:20 AM
Thasp

Quote:

Originally Posted by Poodle

:confused: On load Rd600 is the coolest high end chipset for C2D. Temps don't say anything (the diode don't always tell the whole truth). You have to look at power consumption. And this chart says the Rd600 is 30W cooler than the 975X. http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2891&p=6

I'm gonna put a Hr-05 on that NB anyway.

Good luck trying, read here

I'm still going to fit my MCW30 on there somehow when I get it, if not just to prove him wrong. :D I think I can make it fit if I use the things used to keep the stock heatsink on the board with the waterblock, we'll see.
12-25-2006, 12:35 AM
Raja@ASUS

there's at least one chipset cooler I know of that should fit as it has adjustable hook mounts, lloking the the measurments that eva provided that seems fine. If you read that thread in full you'll see the replies.

regards
Raja
12-25-2006, 12:58 AM
Thasp

I'm 100% sure that it's possible, I have read the thread in full.

Can you take the hook mounts off the stock heatsink, for those of us with subpar cheapo chipset waterblocks that come with one set of mounts?
12-25-2006, 02:43 AM
marauder16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Poodle

I'm gonna put a Hr-05 on that NB anyway.

you sure it'll fit?
12-25-2006, 02:57 AM
Poodle

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thasp

Good luck trying, read here

I'm still going to fit my MCW30 on there somehow when I get it, if not just to prove him wrong. :D I think I can make it fit if I use the things used to keep the stock heatsink on the board with the waterblock, we'll see.

Quote:

Originally Posted by marauder16

you sure it'll fit?

Quite. It comes with both the "normal" and Intel style mounting. How many more mounting styles can there be??? I will probably use the SLi version as my Ultra 120 will be take so much space and use some kind of radial blower to blow over the Hr-05 from the side (e.g. from the front of the case).
12-25-2006, 03:02 AM
marauder16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Poodle

Quite. It comes with both the "normal" and Intel style mounting. How many more mounting styles can there be??? I will probably use the SLi version as my Ultra 120 will be take so much space and use some kind of radial blower to blow over the Hr-05 from the side (e.g. from the front of the case).

thnx, I've been considering it but wasn't sure if it'll fit, but now I'm buying it for certain :D
12-25-2006, 03:07 AM
Poodle

Quote:

Originally Posted by marauder16

thnx, I've been considering it but wasn't sure if it'll fit, but now I'm buying it for certain :D

Well I've read happy's post again. He ain't so sure... I'm used to "make things fit". So I'll go into the workshop if needed.
12-25-2006, 03:09 AM
marauder16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Poodle

Well I've read happy's post again. He ain't so sure... I'm used to "make things fit". So I'll go into the workshop if needed.

Well if you use stock hooks there should be no problem, if not I'l make it fit, of course ;)
12-25-2006, 04:29 AM
The Stilt

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revv23

Hey stilt, thanks for the answer, if possible, can you say if 450fsb 1:1 is better performance or would it be better async at 1200?

I'm only asking is 450fsb is my personal sweet spot, so im trying to figure out which would be better...

as you said 420fsb is max in sync, so maybe 420 sync compared to 570async if possible?

Thanks again! :)

Atleast Everest reports alot higher bandwidth and lower latency for sync mode ;)

Unfortunately I don´t have a screenshot for a 485FSB / DDR-1200 Async, but with those clocks Everest read score is just over 11k and latency 65ns or so.

In sync mode the board will work with ridicilously tight timings.
RDT at CL + 4 Clocks, tWR at 4 and tWTR at 2 is not a problem ;)

http://www.armada.fi/DFI_ICFX3200-T2..._ECMB_Sync.jpg

http://www.armada.fi/DFI_ICFX3200-T2...rPI1M_Sync.jpg

Here are the settings that I use for sync mode (ASM):

PHP Code:

Memory CAS Latency (RD_LAT): 4 Clocks Memory Write Latency (WR_LAT): 3 Clocks Activate to Read Delay (tRCDR): 4 clocks Activate to Write Delay (tRCDW): 4 Clocks Precharge Command Period (tRP) 3 Clocks Internal Read to Precharge Command Delay (tRTP): 2 Clocks Write Recovery Time (tWR): 4 Clocks Activate Blank A to Active B Command Period (tRRD): 2 Clocks Activate to Precharge Command (tRAS): 1 Clocks Row Cycle Time Command Period (tRC): 7 Clocks Auto-Refresh Command Period (tRFC): 20 Clocks Read to Read Command to Different CS (tRTR_CS): 2 Clocks Read to Write Bus Turnaround (tRTW): 3 Clocks Internal Write to Read Command Delay (tWTR): 2 Clocks Write to Read Command to Different CS (tWTR_CS): 2 Clocks Write to Write Command to Different CS (tWTW_CS): 2 Clocks CAS to CAS Command Delay (tCCD): 2 Clocks CKE Minimum High and Low Pulse Width (tCKE): 3 Clocks Exit Precharge Power Down to Any Valid Command (tXP): 8 Clocks Exit Active Power Down to read Command (tXARDS): 6 Clocks ODT Power Down Exit Latency (tAXPD): 8 Clocks Precharge for All 8 Banks Memories (tRPALL): 1 Clocks Bank to Bank Activate Rolling Window (tFAW): 2 Clocks Mode Register Set Command Cycle Time (tMRD): 2 Clocks On Die Termination (ODT): 75 ohm Read Data Transfer (RDT): CL + 4 Clock

And the bios settings:

PHP Code:

Performance Options Memory Clock Frequency: SYNC Control CPU Frequency: Manual CPU Frequency(MHz): 450 NB FSB Strapping: 333 PCIE Overclock: 100 Software Reset Clockgen: Disabled Memory Overclocking: Disabled ------------------- NorthBridge Selections Memory Channels: Auto Memory Power Management: Disabled IGD Clock Gate: Disable NB Channel Mapping: Manual Simple Addr Translation: Disable Chip-Select Swap: Disable Burst Length: 8 Bank0 Map GFX: 4 Bank1 Map GFX: 5 Bank2 Map GFX: 6 Channel Mapping NB: 15 Channel Mapping GFX: 1 Bank0 Map NB: 5 Bank1 Map NB: 11 Bank2 Map NB: 7 -------- Memory Timing Menu CS Output Timing: Auto Dual Channel Split Mode: Auto Addr/CMD Driving Pre-AMP: Enabled Addr/CMD Driving Strenght: 06 Address/Command Timing: 2T Memory Timing Select: Auto Read Data Transfer: Enabled Read Strobe Delay: Disable Read Strobe Arrival: Enabled -------- FSB IO Strenght FSB IO Driving Control: Default 1X NMOS Strenght: 14h 1X PMOS Strenght: 15h 2X NMOS Strenght: 14h 2X PMOS Strenght: 15h 4X NMOS Strenght: 14h 4X PMOS Strenght: 15h ------------------------- CPU VID Control: 1.36250V CPU VID Special Add: Auto DDR2 RAM 1.8V Voltage: 2.41V CPU VTT 1.2V Voltage: 1.44V NB Core 1.2V Voltage: 1.72V NB PLL 1.8V Voltage: 2.31V NB PLL 1.2V Voltage: 1.38V NB PCI-E 1.2V Voltage: 1.34V NB Core 1.2V Convert From: 2.31V SB Core 1.2V Voltage: 1.34V Clockgen Voltage: 2.92V GTL REF Voltage Control: Disabled CPU Core 1/2 GTL REF Voltage: 48 CPU Core 3/4 GTL REF Voltage: 48 North Bridge GTL REF Voltage: 128 CPU PLL Setting Override: Enabled Conroe P-State Multiplier: x8 C1E Function: Disabled
12-25-2006, 04:31 AM
The Stilt

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thasp

I'm 100% sure that it's possible, I have read the thread in full.

Can you take the hook mounts off the stock heatsink, for those of us with subpar cheapo chipset waterblocks that come with one set of mounts?

MCW30 fits perfectly on the board with the standard two hook sets.
I´m using it with Tuniq Tower 120.
12-25-2006, 04:51 AM
nealh

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Stilt

MCW30 fits perfectly on the board with the standard two hook sets.
I´m using it with Tuniq Tower 120.

Any chance for a nice pic?
12-25-2006, 05:25 AM
Revv23

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Stilt

Atleast Everest reports alot higher bandwidth and lower latency for sync mode ;)

Unfortunately I don´t have a screenshot for a 485FSB / DDR-1200 Async, but with those clocks Everest read score is just over 11k and latency 65ns or so.

In sync mode the board will work with ridicilously tight timings.
RDT at CL + 4 Clocks, tWR at 4 and tWTR at 2 is not a problem ;)

Wow, Thanks again! :)

Have you tried for 1T max in sync? The 1:1 performance is just awesome.

:toast:
12-25-2006, 08:13 AM
Gambit_2K

The VR-Zone review really sucked IMO. Why did they use the infinity and turn it so the hot air blows down on the chispet heatsink? Of course your gonna wind up with a high temperature on the NB. If I do the same thing on my P5B DLX it wouldn't even boot over 420 MHz FSB and the temp would be 10C higher then if I pointed the infinity in another direction. Not to mention that man GFX card would get warmer to.

There is a Swedish expression "Gör om, gör rätt" = Do it again, do it right.
12-25-2006, 08:19 AM
eva2000

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gambit_2K

The VR-Zone review really sucked IMO. Why did they use the infinity and turn it so the hot air blows down on the chispet heatsink? Of course your gonna wind up with a high temperature on the NB. If I do the same thing on my P5B DLX it wouldn't even boot over 420 MHz FSB and the temp would be 10C higher then if I pointed the infinity in another direction. Not to mention that man GFX card would get warmer to.

There is a Swedish expression "Gör om, gör rätt" = Do it again and do it right.

Don't think it's that bad.. i have the same fan direction with Tuniq Tower 120 on my DFI ICFX3200 as well

http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/mot..._RD600_169.JPG

Only diff is i don't shove 2.3+ volts on the NB in bios :)

I added a sunon 60x25mm 23.5cfm fan over the stock passive heatsink and dropped ~10C in temps under load.. i've only tried as high as 1.76v for NB bios read 50C NB temps
12-25-2006, 08:28 AM
Gambit_2K

Quote:

Originally Posted by eva2000

Don't think it's that bad.. i have the same fan direction with Tuniq Tower 120 on my DFI ICFX3200 as well

Only diff is i don't shove 2.3+ volts on the NB in bios :)

I added a sunon 60x25mm 23.5cfm fan over the stock passive heatsink and dropped ~10C in temps under load.. i've only tried as high as 1.76v for NB bios read 50C NB temps

Hmm okey but can you confirm that the NB temp is 70 C @ stock? Maybe not through bios but through touch? And over 100C @ overclocking? <-- Maybe not by touch ;). When I run 470 FSb on my PB5 DLX I can still touch my heatsink without burning myself. Suddenly a snakesnest of heatpipes around the board doesn't seem like all that bad of an idea.

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:42 AM.

XtremeSystems