P5W DH (975x), Commando (p965), eVga 680i A1 testing and comparison.

[crazyea]

Well, it's kind of odd for me to have 3 m/b's of this caliber. To not run some benchies and compare them first hand would be criminal, especially here at XtremeSystems.

Here is a rundown of the tests I will use:

1. Sandra
2. Everest
3. SuperPI
4. 3dMark01
6. PCmark05
5. Cinebench 9.5.

I know there are a lot of other considerations for benchmarks, but I think these cover a decent spectrum for analysis of the m/b's.

I intend to run the benchmarks under these guidlines.

1. Stock Cpu (e6600)
2. Overclocked Cpu to 3.2 (400x8)
3. Minimum of DDR2-800 (4-4-4-12)
4. Vista Ultimate (yeh, I know, it's what I have)

Ok guys, I'm gonna get it started.....:-0

Gear list:

1. e6600 + Ultra 120 + panaflow 68.9cfm fan
2. 8800gtx 768mb
3. P5W DH, Commando, eVga 680i a1
3. Mushkin pc8500 5-5-4-12 D9GMH
4. 2x320gb Seagate Raid-0
5. Corsair 620hx PSU

[crazyea]

Results Part 1:

PCMark05
Stock 9*266 - 2.4ghz
- P5W DH Deluxe 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 6570
- Commando 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 6521
- evga680i 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 6310

OC 8*400 - 3.2ghz
- P5W DH Deluxe 800@4-3-3-8-2 - 8046
- P5W DH Deluxe 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 7995
- Commando - 7854
- evga680i 800@4-3-3-8-1 - 7663
- evga680i 1066@5-5-4-12-2 - 7625
- evga680i 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 7529

OC2 9*400 - 3.6ghz
- P5W DH Deluxe 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 8717
- evga680i 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 8226




3DMark01
Stock 9*266 - 2.4ghz
- P5W DH Deluxe 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 36405
- Commando 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 36091
- evga680i 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 35164

OC 8*400 - 3.2ghz
- P5W DH Deluxe 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 46967
- P5W DH Deluxe 800@4-3-3-8-2 - 46438
- Commando 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 45686
- evga680i 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 45479
- evga680i 1066@5-5-4-12-2 - 44979
- evga680i 800@4-3-3-8-1 - 43952

OC2 9*400 - 3.6ghz
- P5W DH Deluxe 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 50472
- evga680i 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 49494



SuperPI
Stock - 2.4ghz 9*266
- P5W DH Deluxe 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 21.185s
- Commando 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 21.263s
- evga680i 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 21.406s

OC - 3.2ghz 8*400
- P5W DH Deluxe 800@4-3-3-8-2 - 15.959s
- P5W DH Deluxe 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 15.975s
- Commando 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 16.006s
- evga680i 1066@5-5-4-12-2 - 16.156s
- evga680i 800@4-3-3-8-1 - 16.172s
- evga680i 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 16.234s

OC2 - 3.6ghz 9*400
- P5W DH Deluxe 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 14.243s
- evga680i 800@4-4-4-12-2 - 14.453s



Sandra
Stock - 2.4ghz 9*266
Arithmetic & Multimedia Graphic Comparison
Disk Performance Graphic Comparison

OC - 3.2ghz 8*400
Arithmetic & Multimedia Graphic Comparison



CINEBENCH 9.5
Graphical Comparison

[crazyea]

Results Part 2:

Everest Cachemem
P5W DH Deluxe
2.4ghz 4-4-4-12-2
3.2ghz 4-4-4-12-2
3.2ghz 4-3-3-8-2
3.6ghz 4-4-4-12-2

Commando Stock 2.4ghz/OC - 3.2ghz
2.4ghz 4-4-4-12-2
3.2ghz 4-4-4-12-2

evga680i Stock 2.4ghz/OC - 3.2ghz/Tweaked - 4-3-3-8-1/OC2 - 3.6ghz
2.4ghz 4-4-4-12-2
3.2ghz 4-4-4-12-2
3.2ghz 4-3-3-8-1
3.6ghz 4-4-4-12-2



Everest Memory

Memory Read


Memory Write


Memory Copy


Memory Latency

[crazyea]

Results Part 3:

Everest CPU/FPU

CPU Queen


CPU PhotoWorxx


CPU ZLib


FPU Julia


FPU Mandel


FPU SinJulia

[lawrywild]

Would be nice if someone could add Intel P35 results too

[fhpchris]

too bad you do not have a quad to test

[BulldogPO]

Yeah, P35 also wanted

[crazyea]

Results for P5W DH and Commando completed. It may be a few days before I can fit the evga in.....

[DAK1640]

How about a spreadsheet for easier viewing / comparison? Good job non the less

[crazyea]

It's been a long day, but I was able to get all the results up. Enjoy!

Rank by clock/clock performance:

1. 975x
2. p965
3. 680i

Observations:

975x has the best performace of the three chipsets. it excels in all areas. The 680i has a slight advantage in memory read. p965 has almost equals the 975x but is slight slower all around. It does benefit from being able to oc memory a little better and higher fsb, but has trouble with lower latencies and even hinders performace when set below cas4. The higher latency in the upper fsb range also reduces performance. 400x8 seems to be the sweet spot (performance, temp, voltage) for all the boards tested. 680i has great memory read bandwidth but can not translate that into better performance in other areas. Like the p965, it benefits from good memory oc abilities. Performance can be tweaked greately with low latencies and can even come close to the 975x, but not enough to knock it from top spot.

I've heard many people over these forums state the poor raid performance of the 680i. Fromy my experience all three boards tested with 2-3% of each other. All 3 solutions were very snappy.

Rank by my preference:

1. 975x - My fav board period.
2. 680i - I'd take it over the p965 as it seems to me like it is a better overall board, with nice features and performance.
3. p965 - Just feels to me like the little/lesser quality brother of the 975x, the mem latency issues cannot be overlooked.

[ChaosMinionX]

Nice comparisons and testing, also where did you find the Everest 4.0 beta 1005?

I too love my 975X, cant wait to see the X38

[crazyea]

I used my license and d/l a beta off BT.

[stormcloud]

Thanks for your effort and good timing as I nearly bought a Commando.

[Gig4moller]

Great comparison, thanks for that effort makes me feel better about my P5W DH purchase a few months ago

[crazyea]

Updated results... Pleae allow a few minutes for images to update in gallery cache. thanks.

[Luis_GT]

Great post, Funny thing, I've already tried all three chipsets too (Asus P5B Deluxe, BFG 680i and Asus P5W DH), and I have to say that the 975X is the best.

[crazyea]

I guess it's a little late in the game. I thought the thread would get more love......

[ZilverPhish]

Maybe it would if you would test a quad

[Envydia007]

nice, I almost bought a 680i, LOL.

[crazyea]

someone send me a quad!!!! dammit.

[Terru]

Yup, this just confirms what I thought. I am planning on buying a P5W DH with a q6600 very soon. When I do, I'll keep you posted.

[shogo_ca]

keep in mind that clock for clock the 975x is faster but it does normally cap around 400-500fsb where the p965 can go over 500 pretty easily = Phase change or lower multi cpu <e6600.

I think if you have a QX6600 or over or a E6600 and you dont need sli, 975x is the best (depends on the mobo, especially for quad, some cannot go over 400fsb with quad core), if you do phase change or have a lower multi cpu then p965 is the way to go and finally if you need need SLI 680i is the way to go...

Things will change with new Intel SLI chipset thought!!.. (sorry for my wallet)



*Really nice comparison/review btw, it takes alot of time and non-lazyness to do all that.

[mukmaster]

975x FTW but I still dont get it how such an old chipset own so much !!!!!!!!!!!!

[fhpchris]

You only tested 1:1 on ram? You are kidding right?

The whole benefit of p965 and 680i is that you can run 550-650 mhz on rams async.

Everyone who is laughing saying that "975 FTMFW" is just lost.

[crazyea]

um, I ran ram at 1066 on the 680i and it didn't really perform much better. also the commando is useless for timings which is why decided not to test meory as much early on.