Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: ASUS Crosshair IV Formula vs. Crosshair IV Extreme - Lucid Hydra analysis

  1. #1
    PIfection
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    989

    ASUS Crosshair IV Formula vs. Crosshair IV Extreme - Lucid Hydra analysis

    ASUS Crosshair 4 Extreme vs Crosshair 4 Formula

    Introduction

    For some time now the Crosshair Formula series from ASUS has been the premier board of choice for those pushing the AMD platform. It has had superior efficiency, superior performance and in all but some subzero scenarios has provided better clocking of AMD cpus. Now ASUS have brought a new player to the market, the Crosshair 4 Extreme, with a bunch of new features to boot.



    So is this just another lame marketing technique, trying to get us to buy equipment we don't need or is there some substance to the Crosshair 4 Extreme? As a big fan of Crosshair 4 Formula and knowing what it is capable of, this board will need to do alot to impress me. Maybe it is best to take a look at what you get extra with this board first, I will just cover the key features for overclockers.

    oc station with r3e and corsair gt 2000c7





    Additional Features

    1. PCIE Spacing

    As seen in the above photos, the PCIE spacing is nice. ASUS have heard the call from the minority of overclockers and gamers wanting to run four GPU's on their board and responded with some nice spacing. Now you could theoretically run four GPU's on the Crosshair 4 Formula but you needed some sort of PCIE extender or the ROG XPANDER. So now we can run 4 ATI cards and 3 NVIDIA cards, soon to be 4... WTF SLI on AMD chipset? Well yes, that brings to me to my next new feature.


    2. Lucid Hydra

    Hydra is a much hyped and awaited technology, promising to bring a hardware based solution for multi-gpu configurations. Hydra supports its own configurations for AMD and NVIDIA cards and also a funky hybrid mode where NVIDIA and AMD cards can run together to render the benchmark. I have to say, Hydra is something I am highly skeptical of, but if it can give me some boost in my benchmarks I think this is an essential feature on a high end benching board.







    3. PCIE on/off switches

    EVGA introduced this with its high end X58 boards and this has been a popular feature among members of the community pushing GPU's subzero. I think this feature is great, put in your 4 GPU's with pots mounted, start with your first card, when its clocking nice, turn your next card on, etc, etc. This is an amazing way to get your 3-4way configurations working nicely and even if I wanted to bench on X58, maybe I would use the CH4E to test my 4 way ATI configuration if my X58 board didn't have on/off switches for PCIE.




    4. Enhanced PWM and related bios features
    ASUS have beefed up the PWM by adding additional phases and including super ml caps, there is also functionality such as PWM switching frequency available via BIOS. No additional 8 pin connector to be seen here though.






    Benchmarks

    I have chosen an array of benchmarks I like to use for platform comparisons. I think these benchmarks give a good indication of the speed of all aspects of the platform including CPU speed, memory speed, nb or uncore, graphics and pci-express latencies. Also including a couple of gaming benchmarks to give a good indication of performance from a gamers perspective.

    Benchmarks:
    • SuperPI 8M - A mix of CPU, memory and nb/uncore
    • Everest - memory bandwidth and latencies
    • Crysis max settings - scales with GPU and CPU
    • 3DMark03 - a good mix of CPU and GPU
    • Heaven max settings - heavily GPU biast
    • Vantage X - heavily GPU biast, in multi GPU configurations CPU/QPI also come into play



    My platforms are using the same common hardware:
    • AMD Thuban 1090T
    • AMD 5870 reference at stock
    • ASUS OC Panel
    • 2x2GB GSKILL 17066 8-9-8-24 Elpida BBSE based sticks



    My platforms are set at the following common settings:
    3600Mhz, 200 bus, 800 MHz 8-9-8-24 1T, 2800 Northbridge, 100 PCI-E




    Benchmark Comparison


    SuperPI 8M - Crosshair 4 Formula


    SuperPI 8M - Crosshair 4 Extreme


    Everest - Crosshair 4 Formula


    Everest - Crosshair 4 Extreme


    Crysis @ VeryHigh, 1920x1080, AA 16xQ, DX10, 1 loop - Crosshair 4 Formula


    Crysis @ VeryHigh, 1920x1080, AA 16xQ, DX10, 1 loop - Crosshair 4 Extreme


    3DMark03 - Crosshair 4 Formula


    3DMark03 - Crosshair 4 Extreme


    Heaven @ DX11, 1920x1200 8xAA fullscreen, shaders high, textures high, tessellation extreme - Crosshair 4 Formula


    Heaven @ DX11, 1920x1200 8xAA fullscreen, shaders high, textures high, tessellation extreme - Crosshair 4 Extreme


    Vantage X - Crosshair 4 Formula


    Vantage X - Crosshair 4 Extreme





    Lucid Hydra Testing
    Lucid Hydra is a very interesting product. It is designed to offer a hardware based multiple GPU rendering replacement to the traditional software based solutions. This has the potential to provide much greater efficiency in multi GPU rendering, resulting in a higher frame rate for the end user. Hydra also introduces some interesting concepts, such as pairing different models of GPU from the same vendor, where often drivers provided by the vendors will not support this. Perhaps the most interesting new idea is the hybrid mode, where GPU's from NVIDIA and ATI can be paired together to create one virtual rendering device.






    I am interested in this technology from a benching perspective. Can I gain some extra frames by turning off crossfire and using hydra instead? Is it better for me to use a combination of AMD and NVIDIA? Lets take a look...

    First I will start with a couple baselines, I will use Crysis and Vantage P as comparison benchmarks. This should give benchers and gamers an idea of how Hydra might benefit them.

    Vantage P, 5870 @ stock, hydra disabled


    Crysis VeryHigh, 5870 @ stock, hydra disabled



    So we have our baseline with a single GPU, lets take a look what happens when we add a GTX280 to our ATI 5870. I am going to be checking out the hybrid feature here, which allows me to pair NVIDIA and ATI cards in a single multi-GPU configuration.

    Vantage P, 5870 @ stock, GTX280 @ stock, hydra enabled


    Crysis VeryHigh, 5870 @ stock, GTX280 @ stock, hydra enabled



    Next I will gather a crossfire baseline, using 2x 5870 with crossfire enabled. Then we can compare the performance of crossfire directly against hydra.

    Vantage P, 2x 5870 @ stock in crossfire, hydra disabled


    Crysis VeryHigh, 2x 5870 @ stock in crossfire, hydra disabled



    Onto Hydra now, so I will disable crossfire and enable Hydra. It is as simple as ticking a box in the included Lucid software and I am ready to go.

    Vantage P, 2x 5870 @ stock, crossfire disabled, hydra enabled


    Crysis VeryHigh, 2x 5870 @ stock, crossfire disabled, hydra enabled






    Analysis

    SuperPI 8M
    Wow the Extreme jumps out to an immediate advantage with a 4 second thrashing of the Formula at 8m, I hate to think what that equates to if we increased the benchmark to 32m. We need to think about what would cause this sort of performance difference in what is basically the same board with some additional features, but no features that should improve superpi performance. The first thing we need to compare is the subtimings set automatically between the two boards, in fact the Extreme is slightly tighter by default. Even when we matched the subs between these boards the Extreme is still 2 seconds faster. Next we need to do a bandwidth comparison between the platform, this is the main area that can provide gains in SuperPI at a locked CPU frequency, on to Everest!


    Everest
    Holy moly look at these results, the Extreme has smashed the Formula into the ground in Everest. Firstly we see a memory read bandwidth advantage of ~500 MB/s to the Extreme, that looks BIG but it is very tiny compared to the 3300 MB/s copy bandwidth advantage the Extreme has. How can a very similar board, running the same configuration be 3300 MB/s faster than another? Again we took a look at the subs, and after tightening the Formula we brand that gap down to around 2500 MB/s, still a very crazy advantage. I have no thoughts as to what could cause these gains, perhaps you can give me some insight?


    Crysis
    I didn't expect to see any big differences between runs in Crysis and the results are nearly identical. The Extreme takes a very tiny lead, this could be as simple as a fluxtuation of scores between runs though. Minimum and maximum frames are also nearly identical.


    3DMark03
    Against the trend the Formula takes a lead in 03. The gains seem to be in GT2 and GT4, this would indicate it is probably a GPU based gain. What would cause the Formula to be fastest in 3D than the Extreme? It could be the Hydra chip slowing this process down, I am unsure at this stage, perhaps a few more 3D benchmarks can uncover some more information.


    Heaven
    Heaven is a great benchmark as it is fairly heavy GPU and we can check out the new DX11 and tessellation technologies. Heaven though has not done anything to help us pick these boards apart in 3D, again the results are very close with the Extreme scoring 373 and the Formula 375. There is one results that might shed a little light, the minimum FPS in Heaven on the Extreme is only 3.0 while the Formula gets 6.7. Perhaps the Hydra chip is hurting FPS with some dips or stutters throughout the benchmark, it shouldn't because Hydra is turned off, but its possible.


    Vantage X
    Vantage X should be able to decide a winner, shouldnt it? Taking a look at the graphics tests, we see GT1 is almost identical but there is some scaling with the Extreme on GT2, as GT2 is very memory sensitive perhaps the Extreme is providing better bandwidth between the CPU and the GPU. I reran these tests a number of times and go very similar FPS in both tests across both platforms.


    Lucid Hydra
    Looking first at our hybrid configuration where we paired a ATI 5870 with an NVIDIA GTX280, looking at the Vantage result we can see significant gains. Both graphics tests scaled nicely and our GPU score went from 17698 with a single 5870 to 21553 with a 5870 and GTX280 in Hydra mode. This is a very promising start and from a benching point of view there looks to be some potential to this setup already, lets take a look at our first Crysis results. Crysis has moved in the opposite direction, while Vantage gave positive gains, Crysis has gone backwards from 33~ FPS to 16~ FPS. The minimum FPS and maximum FPS are both down considerably, from our quick analysis you would conclude Hydra isnt a great idea for Crysis. We noticed both in Vantage and Crysis alot of image stuttering and freezing, this might be exagerated by the age difference between our GPU's and definately because we are using GPU's from different vendors. Lets have a look how Hydra performed in a more traditional single vendor scenario.

    This is what I wanted to see! Hydra is gaining FPS in GT1 and GT2 for Vantage over crossfire. This is big news for overclockers, especially if this scales the same way in different configurations such as 3-way and 4-way and with NVIDIA cards. If there are these sort of gains on other configurations you would think that the majority of 3D benchers will be looking to use a board with Hydra available in the near future to compete at the top end of the rankings. We also have our Crysis results to analyze, again unforunately Crysis goes backwards when we disabled crossfire and enable Hydra, fortunately not as much as last time though.

    It looks like Hydra is going to be quite different from benchmark to benchmark and from game to game, this might be a Hydra driver issue and might develop in time. There are definately some promising results from just he few benchmarks I have done here, I will be interested to see what others discover in the coming months.




    Additional Information

    The heatsink puts out additional heat on the Extreme and I found it needs some active cooling to keep at a comfortable temperature. There is an included fan build into the heatsink but it seems a bit noisy, my choice was to disconnect it and use a 3rd party fan to cool this area.



    The heatsinks have been reworked for the Extreme, probably to cope with the extra heat the Lucid Hydra pumps out. The board definatly looks sexy, the PCIE layout and the new heatsink has only improved the appearance of an already good looking board. It seems red/black are the hot colours for manufactuers, so your Corsair GTX2 and 5870 should feel right at home plugged into this board.



    The ROG connect is a great way to control the platform, having an external ability to control your platform when benching or even adjusting your 24/7 system makes sense. There seems to be an unlimited numbers of ways to connect to ROG connect, including via bluetooth with a phone, direct from a laptop via usb or via the OC station or OC panel. While ASUS have not releases OC panel as a retail device, we hope they do, it provides all the controls overclockers want in a very slick package. We tested a number of ROG connect methods but our favourites were the OC station and OC panel, these methods seemed easiest, quickest and most importantly, it is reliable.

    I almost forgot to mention in terms of bus clocking, ram clocking, north bridge and CPU everything clocks the same. I took a reference chip and checked all of these clocks and they were nearly identical. The only time where you might see some difference is if you are using liquid nitrogen and high voltages, perhaps the revised PWM on the Extreme will come into play and help you in benchmarks like wprime and Vantage.






    Conclusions

    I want to leave these results fairly open and let you decide your own conclusions.

    Personally I think this board is a better choice if you are interest in 2D benchmarks due to its superior memory performance. If you want to push your CPU with high voltage under LN2 perhaps the Extreme is also your preferred choice due to beefed up PWM and the nice additional of PCI-E on/off switches.

    The one huge benefit I see for overclockers is the Lucid Hydra chip. If used in the right combinations (and I am sure there are 100s of different combinations you can try) there might be some huge gains to be had in a number of 3D benchmarks. I only touched the surface with 2x 5870's in Vantage. I am looking forward to seeing the innovative ways people use Hydra with 3D benchmarks.

    For gamers having SLI on the AMD chipset without low performing (but ingenius) software hacks will be very inticing. There are alot of AMD fan boys that I am sure would love to grab a pair of 470s or maybe even a quartet of 480s. Right now Hydra only offers 3 way SLI/CF but a driver update should be available in the near future to extend that to 4 way.

    I like the Crosshair 4 Formula and use it for the majority of my AMD benching but I LOVE the Crosshair 4 Extreme and unfortunately for the Formula I think it might have to sit in its box a little more...
    Last edited by youngpro; 10-06-2010 at 04:08 PM.

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    23
    Awesome post youngpro

    Been looking forward to the C4E for a while now.

    I'm looking forward to getting one and seeing how 3 - 4 x 6k AMD cards go, and then a mix of 5970 + 5870 and then SLI GTX480's go.

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    61
    Wow, something very interesting
    Thanks Youngpro for the news.....

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    48
    awesome man !

  5. #5
    Xtreme X.I.P
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Belgium, Namur
    Posts
    1,864
    Nice one, i will post my review today ... and i got similar results. BTW difference between CFX 5870 hydra disable vs CFX hydra enable is biger than the difference between SLI 480GTX (hacked Nvidia drivers) hydra disable and SLI hydra enabled.
    ***** Visit us on PCWorld.fr *****

  6. #6
    PIfection
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    989
    thanks guys

    yeah Thomas I was wondering how that would pan out, will be interested to see your results...

    got some ram clocking results here to share, this is with the FLARE and subs tightened a little bit... I just wanted to see what the platform is capable of in terms of tuned air ram clocks..


  7. #7
    Xtreme X.I.P
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Belgium, Namur
    Posts
    1,864
    ***** Visit us on PCWorld.fr *****

  8. #8
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Prestonsburg, KY
    Posts
    545
    Pro I love this review man. The layout is nice, the tone is nice, and you only test what people are interested in.


  9. #9
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Russia
    Posts
    1,910
    thanks for very interesting test mate

    Intel Q9650 @500x9MHz/1,3V
    Asus Maximus II Formula @Performance Level=7
    OCZ OCZ2B1200LV4GK 4x2GB @1200MHz/5-5-5-15/1,8V
    OCZ SSD Vertex 3 120Gb
    Seagate RAID0 2x ST1000DM003
    XFX HD7970 3GB @1111MHz
    Thermaltake Xaser VI BWS
    Seasonic Platinum SS-1000XP
    M-Audio Audiophile 192
    LG W2486L
    Liquid Cooling System :
    ThermoChill PA120.3 + Coolgate 4x120
    Swiftech Apogee XT, Swiftech MCW-NBMAX Northbridge
    Watercool HeatKiller GPU-X3 79X0 Ni-Bl + HeatKiller GPU Backplate 79X0
    Laing 12V DDC-1Plus with XSPC Laing DDC Reservoir Top
    3x Scythe S-FLEX "F", 4x Scythe Gentle Typhoon "15", Scythe Kaze Master Ace 5,25''

    Apple MacBook Pro 17` Early 2011:
    CPU: Sandy Bridge Intel Core i7 2720QM
    RAM: Crucial 2x4GB DDR3 1333
    SSD: Samsung 840 Pro 256 GB SSD
    HDD: ADATA Nobility NH13 1GB White
    OS: Mac OS X Mavericks

  10. #10
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    10,374
    Great so stuff James. So Asus improved the ram efficiency. I wonder how it turns out at +2000mhz speeds (where in my tests the Formula was not so efficient at all)

    Would love to see how it faires against the new PCB rev 890FX UD7 (think you got that one already :p)
    Question : Why do some overclockers switch into d*ckmode when money is involved

    Remark : They call me Pro Asus Saaya yupp, I agree

  11. #11
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    75
    I'm seeing that hydra works 'bad' with ATI + nVidia, but is great with 2xATI ou 2xnVidia (At least was my conclusion). Nice review!!

  12. #12
    PIfection
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    989
    Wow Thomas that changes the game doesnt it,

    what happens to 2,3,4 card world records when we see a quality x58 board capable of pushing a cpu and ram properly running hydra...

    i guess there are alot of things to consider, does hydra keep scaling like crossfire when cpu goes up? can the board clock as well in terms of cpu with this technology enabled?

    400 points is a big difference without changing anything... also will hydra be alot easier to deal with than the sometimes difficult catalyst and nvidia drivers when running 4-way..

    wow i am waiting for ASUS, EVGA or Giga to put a X58 in front of me with hydra

  13. #13
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    China
    Posts
    266
    I want to see some extreme oc shows






  14. #14
    Xtreme X.I.P
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Belgium, Namur
    Posts
    1,864
    Quote Originally Posted by youngpro View Post
    Wow Thomas that changes the game doesnt it,

    what happens to 2,3,4 card world records when we see a quality x58 board capable of pushing a cpu and ram properly running hydra...

    i guess there are alot of things to consider, does hydra keep scaling like crossfire when cpu goes up? can the board clock as well in terms of cpu with this technology enabled?

    400 points is a big difference without changing anything... also will hydra be alot easier to deal with than the sometimes difficult catalyst and nvidia drivers when running 4-way..

    wow i am waiting for ASUS, EVGA or Giga to put a X58 in front of me with hydra
    XPander with hydra chip in place of 2 NF200 will be great when new hydra drivers will support 4 - ways
    ***** Visit us on PCWorld.fr *****

  15. #15
    PIfection
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    989
    ANDRE listen to this man, we need XPANDER rev 2.0 with Lucid Hydra !

  16. #16
    I am Xtreme FlanK3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Czech republic
    Posts
    6,823
    nice result, can u test (with the same CPU) max OC potencial (CPU, clock, busspeed clock etc..). Thx
    ROG Power PCs - Intel and AMD
    CPUs:i9-7900X, i9-9900K, i7-6950X, i7-5960X, i7-8086K, i7-8700K, 4x i7-7700K, i3-7350K, 2x i7-6700K, i5-6600K, R7-2700X, 4x R5 2600X, R5 2400G, R3 1200, R7-1800X, R7-1700X, 3x AMD FX-9590, 1x AMD FX-9370, 4x AMD FX-8350,1x AMD FX-8320,1x AMD FX-8300, 2x AMD FX-6300,2x AMD FX-4300, 3x AMD FX-8150, 2x AMD FX-8120 125 and 95W, AMD X2 555 BE, AMD x4 965 BE C2 and C3, AMD X4 970 BE, AMD x4 975 BE, AMD x4 980 BE, AMD X6 1090T BE, AMD X6 1100T BE, A10-7870K, Athlon 845, Athlon 860K,AMD A10-7850K, AMD A10-6800K, A8-6600K, 2x AMD A10-5800K, AMD A10-5600K, AMD A8-3850, AMD A8-3870K, 2x AMD A64 3000+, AMD 64+ X2 4600+ EE, Intel i7-980X, Intel i7-2600K, Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930KAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread Intel Cinebench R15 thread

  17. #17
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany - Königswinter
    Posts
    3
    The Design of the C4E is more like sh** ....

  18. #18
    I am Xtreme FlanK3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Czech republic
    Posts
    6,823
    no, its beatufil monstrum. Maybe only little fan is not good point...But colorschema and pasiv heatsink are beautifull
    ROG Power PCs - Intel and AMD
    CPUs:i9-7900X, i9-9900K, i7-6950X, i7-5960X, i7-8086K, i7-8700K, 4x i7-7700K, i3-7350K, 2x i7-6700K, i5-6600K, R7-2700X, 4x R5 2600X, R5 2400G, R3 1200, R7-1800X, R7-1700X, 3x AMD FX-9590, 1x AMD FX-9370, 4x AMD FX-8350,1x AMD FX-8320,1x AMD FX-8300, 2x AMD FX-6300,2x AMD FX-4300, 3x AMD FX-8150, 2x AMD FX-8120 125 and 95W, AMD X2 555 BE, AMD x4 965 BE C2 and C3, AMD X4 970 BE, AMD x4 975 BE, AMD x4 980 BE, AMD X6 1090T BE, AMD X6 1100T BE, A10-7870K, Athlon 845, Athlon 860K,AMD A10-7850K, AMD A10-6800K, A8-6600K, 2x AMD A10-5800K, AMD A10-5600K, AMD A8-3850, AMD A8-3870K, 2x AMD A64 3000+, AMD 64+ X2 4600+ EE, Intel i7-980X, Intel i7-2600K, Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930KAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread Intel Cinebench R15 thread

  19. #19
    PIfection
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    989
    Flank3r, I test the same CPU on both platforms before I write this review and everything is nearly identical.

    The Formula clocks ram slightly higher, but even when the Extreme is 20MHz behind, the bandwidth is MUCH higher. So what do you want though, superficial ram clocks? Or actual bandwidth? The lower ram clocks have no impact on performance on the Extreme, infact the opposite, the bandwidth is much higher, so even it is clocked 100 MHz behind, the boards bandwidth are about on par.

    In terms of everything else, almost identical, with 5-15MHz which is just a normal different you might find between two boards of the same model...

  20. #20
    Crunch-Fu Adept
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Czech Rep.
    Posts
    1,485
    How about a Formula BIOS souped from the Extreme BIOS?

    I am just thinking out loud and wondering what makes the Extreme ahead in the memory BW area
    Sometimes a good slap in the face is all you need

    Bios my arss.....
    I can fix this problem with a hardware mod....
    Hipro5


    "Overclock till death. Overclocking is life." Hipro5

  21. #21
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Overclockers UK
    Posts
    264
    upgrade to pro?
    ≠ 4770K - R9 290X Crossfire
    www.overclockers.co.uk

  22. #22
    PIfection
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    989
    damnit photobucket, okay should be ok now eheh

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •