Intel X58 Motherboard Roundup - What does $300 Get You?
by Gary Key on December 5, 2008 3:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Initial Overclocking Results
We are working on a comprehensive overclocking guide for the i7/X58 platform to fully explain each BIOS setting as well as providing an easy to follow set of instructions to get the most out of this new platform. In the meantime, we are showing our initial overclocking results with air-cooling and the i920. To be blunt, overclocking the i920 on air to 4GHz is fairly simple: raise Bclk to 191, enable turbo and HT modes, set VCore to 1.4125V, VTT to 1.30V, VDimm to 1.67V, and set your 6GB kit to 9-9-9-24 as a good base start. After that, it is merely a matter of fine tuning the voltages a little and adjusting memory timings for improved performance and/or stability. Of course, all of this depends on the quality of your memory, cooling, and CPU. In our case, even with very good air-cooling, we found the practical limit for VCore to be around 1.425V without incurring throttling under load temperatures. Based on this setting, we arrived at our 21x191 setting. We will take a further look at overclocking on these boards and others with a CoolIT Systems Freezone Elite shortly.
Our overclocking numbers are reached with HT and Turbo settings enabled on a retail CPU. This adds a significant load on the IMC and memory system resulting in the need to run higher voltages than if we turned off HT or Turbo, especially HT. In fact, a 19x211 (ES CPU) setting without HT or Turbo enabled resulted in us lowering VCore from the 1.4125V range to 1.35V and VDimm from an average of 1.67V to 1.64V while retaining like CPU clock speeds and stability. Performance is basically equal, except in applications that take advantage of four or more cores where a slight lead goes to an HT enabled system. Our retail CPU sample is not the best around so our non HT/Turbo enabled voltages and Bclk numbers could be improved with a better unit. In fact, the retail CPU we utilized refused to go over a 205 Bclk so we had to use an ES sample for the 19x211 testing. We have additional CPUs arriving shortly.
All of our boards easily reached 21x191 for a turbo boosted speed of 4010MHz or so. Each board was able to run our Corsair or Mushkin 1600MHz 6GB kits at CAS7 with ASUS offering the best timings at 7-7-7-20 1T, Gigabyte at 7-8-7-24 1T, MSI at 7-8-7-20 1T, and EVGA at 7-8-7-20 1T. Memory performance was very close for each solution considering the Bclk ratio was not exactly at 191 as set in the BIOS. The EVGA board returned a 190.5 setting, MSI at 191.5, ASUS at 190.9, and Gigabyte at 191. Even accounting for the various Bclk speeds, the boards were extremely close in the write, copy, and latency numbers; the exact numbers we think are extremely important for improving system performance with an IMC design, whether from Intel or AMD.
Overall, we think the Gigabyte numbers are the best and for good reason. On each board, we set the basic timings based on extensive stability testing and let each individual board set the balance of the subtimings based on their auto settings. Gigabyte offers an additional memory setting that improves subtimings automatically; there are three different settings: Standard, Turbo,and Extreme. We utilized the Turbo setting without affecting stability. The Standard setting returned results that were slightly lower than the other boards and the Extreme setting was not stable.
This is not to take away from the performance of the other boards. In fact, each successive MSI BIOS has improved memory performance and stability greatly, to the point now that the Eclipse board is able to run with the wolves. ASUS started out with the fastest memory performance, and in our initial testing beyond 4GHz their ability to run tighter timings pays off as you increase Bclk rates. EVGA just provided a BIOS that opens up 24 different subtimings and we could improve memory performance about 3% after a quick session.
Of course, manually tuning each setting certainly results in better performance in certain benchmarks - you know, the ones like SuperPI 32M, AquaMark, or WinRAR. However, you will never notice the difference in daily usage unless you do it wrong and wonder why Excel or Crysis constantly crashes. So, for the majority of users we highly recommend auto settings for the subtimings - and often for the base memory timings as well.
The one knock we have against the Gigabyte board is that VDroop is present even with load line calibration enabled. We had to set our VCore to 1.4250 to 1.4300V to ensure stability after accounting for VDroop; however, the board proved to be stable at a real 1.392V ~ 1.412V. The EVGA board tended to overvolt slightly under load while the MSI and ASUS boards kept VCore stable.
Overclocking to 21x191 with our G.Skill or Patriot 1600MHz kits was like an Indiana Jones adventure. Just when we thought the treasure of stability was in our hands, it would slip away quickly and we had to go through some exciting travels to get it back. To be honest, the ASUS board was the easiest to clock high with 12GB installed. The Gigabyte and EVGA products required a few BIOS revisions before we could overclock properly and we are still fighting with the MSI board. All of the manufacturers stated that they fully support 12GB operation up to DDR3-1333, but after that, the IMC is being pushed beyond its official rating from Intel. However, like the official 1.65V VDimm warning, we basically ignored the official rating and set off to see how high we could go on air-cooling.
Let's get the bad news out of the way first. We could not get the MSI board stable past a 21x175 setting utilizing manual tuning methods. We tried every setting, especially setting tRFC to 74 or higher and starting with 10-10-10-24 timings, but nothing worked. If we set the board to auto settings for voltages and memory, manually set Bclk to 200, and turned on Turbo/HT the board would work; however, VCore was set to 1.48V, VTT to 1.48V, and VDimm to 1.90V. Not bad for a stable 4.1GHz, and considering the relationship between VTT and VDimm, we were within a safe range for not destroying our CPU. However, the VCore level was too much for our air-cooling solution on a 24/7 basis and after a few hours load temps would rise past 90C, throttling would occur, and our system would crash. What we found to be strange was that a 21x191 manual setting, but with all other settings the same as the 21x200 setup, would crash the system after the initial POST sequence. MSI is working on it and we expect a solution shortly.
We were able to run the ASUS board at memory timings of 8-8-8-20 2T compared to 9-8-8-24 1T on the Gigabyte and EVGA boards. Memory performance was nearly identical between each board and once again showed that we could make a choice if required between a lower CAS setting with 2T or a higher CAS setting with 1T enabled without really affecting performance in our application benchmarks. We had to set VCore to 1.425V, VTT to 1.325V, IOH to 1.20V, and VDimm to 1.70V for 24/7 stability on each board. Once again, the Gigabyte board operated fine even though VDroop meant real voltage swung between 1.392V and 1.412V. We could have slightly reduced our VCore settings to 1.4125V on the ASUS and EVGA board but we always had Crysis Warhead lock up on us after the 15th pass out of 25.
Overall, we generally found it was easier to overclock with the ASUS P6T-Deluxe and could easily do it on mostly auto settings. We would recommend this board for those who do not want to get their hands too dirty to reach a reasonable overclock level. The ASUS BIOS is very informative and lists out the min/max and standard settings for the major BIOS options, and a new user interested in overclocking will find this comforting. You can still get down and dirty with the P6T when it comes to tweaking the BIOS for best performance. Based on this we find the ASUS board to have a very balanced design for both types of users.
Except for the informative BIOS settings, the same basically holds true for the EVGA X58 SLI board, and in some ways we liked its simplicity of settings when overclocking. The latest BIOS allows you to tweak further but still not to the absolute degree of the ASUS or Gigabyte boards. Since the V15 BIOS, getting high Bclk with 12GB has been relatively easy and pain free. Also, the BIOS is smart about setting the right auto timings to get the best possible performance while retaining stability. This platform has also proved to be rock stable. Depending on your memory supplier, there might be a need to set tRFC to 74 or higher when clocking high with 12GB installed.
The MSI Eclipse X58 is an interesting board; it has all the makings of a great overclocking platform and yet the BIOS is still a tweak or two away from being really good. The board performed equally to the other offerings with a 3GB or 6GB memory load but buckled underneath the pressure when loaded with 12GB. Based on the progress MSI has made in the past couple of weeks, we expect this problem to be solved shortly. The one item of note when overclocking this board is that a few of the voltage settings in the BIOS are rather cryptic as MSI utilizes a +/- setting for changes. The base voltage information is not always listed so the user has to have prior knowledge of base settings before making an informed decision.
The Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5 is a tweaker's delight, and based on our initial testing with the latest F4K series BIOS we have no doubt now about the potential capabilities it offers. Gigabyte has come a long a way in improving the overclocking capabilities of this board along with improved performance and stability in a short time. If Gigabyte could match usability features of the ASUS BIOS and improve auto settings, we feel like this board could ultimately offer the best overclocking experience in the mid-range X58 market.
78 Comments
View All Comments
TeXWiller - Friday, December 5, 2008 - link
Are you sure the 6 DIMM configuration is even supported with the current Nehalem at DDR3-1333 speed? Supermicro X8SAX, for example, does not support 6 DIMM configuration over DDR3-1066 speed, which is also the maximum Intel supported speed. This might explain some of those POST related problems.javamann - Friday, December 5, 2008 - link
I usually go for the high end board but I don't overclock. I expect if a board is built to run at a higher speed running at a normal speed would sit in the middle of the bell curve of it operating parameters. I would also expect it to just work. My bad.mjz - Friday, December 5, 2008 - link
not having support for 24GB ram of the bat is ridiculous.. With DDR3 ram going to be at a decent price next year, why not??? having 15GB as a ram disk would be amazing for many people.. this is MB companies being lasyAeroWB - Friday, December 5, 2008 - link
"Hey guys, Anand here. I'm writing this sub-section, not at Gary's request, but because I felt it was necessary."I totaly agree with you here, thanks for letting us know the size of the problem and Gary thanks for all those fixes.
"The point being is that we feel the lack of quality assurance before a product hits the market has now reached an all time high."
I do believe this is true, and I also have to say that I'm having problems with these kind of things for quite some years now, and I'm getting sick and tired of this.
For me the crap kickstarted in 2001 with an MSI mainboard, one brand I will never buy again...
(2001) MSI K7N420 Pro, it took MSI half a year to fix the issue of not being able to run the ram in dual channel mode on default speed without data corruption (the year I learned about memtest86) Also this board could not boot from an LSI 21320-R SCSI card and that problem has never been fixed (the Asus board with the same chipset could do it but my attempt to put that bioscode in the MSI bios failed)
(2003) Asus A7N8X-E Deluxe. onboard Marvell Gigabit card corrupted data, about one bit each 2GB so all my DVD downloads were corrupt! at 100Mbit it worked ok, an add-on Gb card also worked ok, lots of bios updates, no solution. Here's probably too much controllers cramped in not enough space. After 3 years upgrading the ram to 2GB didn't work, tried a lot of different brands. Bought an Intel D975XBX. (but the asus did support my LSI SCSI card!)
(2005) SuperMicro PDSGE, I finally bought a board with PCI-X for my Netware Server with SmartArray controller (which before was running in an Intel D945GTP desktopboard on PCI). The SmartArray card would boot, I got 2 special biosses for the board from Supermicro (great supportteam) but could't get it to work so added extra disk to boot the system, problem never solved. but it seems strange the controller working on a desktopboard and not on a server board. Updating the SmartArray also didn't help, My server still runs this board but now has a never HP SmartArray 641 that does work.
(2008) Asus M3A78-T, Razer Lachesis mouse is not working when powering up, I have to reinsert the usb connector of it everytime I start the computer to get it working (standby doesn't help) In 4 months I have flashed 3 newer bios versions in the mainboard and 2 in the mouse. Problem still exists. The Lachesis works fine in my IntelD975XBX system. My Razer Copperhead works fine in both (so I swapped the mice)
All listed boards are only from my private systems, I work at a computershop for over 10 years so needless to say I saw much more bios/board misery.
So far I have had the least problems with Intel boards but they also have their share of problems. Some years ago the company switched from Asus to Intel partially because alot of customers sometimes accidently overclocked their system (the boards got into the bios if they thought the post failed) and it got unstable. I really do not get why there are so many overclocker options while 90% of the people doesn't use it and just want a stable system. If for example I now look at Asus' website I almost get a heart attack, there are just too many mainboard models, most are not interesting at all, too many useless onboard crap, too expensive, absurd features (Aopen tube board for example), crap quality chipsets, etc. And in all that mess there's no board without overclocking and quality components except maybe some Intel models. Try to find a board that will get your vidcard and soundcard a real free non-shared interrupt, you can't. So there is too many stuff and not enough simple quality models. How can they test and support all those models, well they can't as we know now. They don't update drivers for their chipsets and onboard junk, so you have to search yourself. It looks like they haven't got enough time to do it good so why not make less models and get it working right. All of this holds true for many brands not only Asus. Maybe the economic crysis will have a positive side-effect of getting less different models but better supported and tested components.
Only pointing the finger at the manufacturers however is too easy.
Lots of review-sites focus on speed and overclocking, exagerating speed differences, over-hyping all kind of not-so-usefull onboard junk. Its all speed and quantity for the least money, so boards come factory overclocked, memory timings set to tight, onboard controllers that almost no-one needs etc. Just so it looks they provide more bang for the buck then the competition and get a better review score.
Lots of customers want the most speed and features for the least money, and forget about quality, support etc. Manufacturers look at the market and provide the crap that people scream for to get bashed by those customers for the crap, that will still buy the cheapest stuff next time. so the demand for shit doesn't decrease so the shit is provided again....
chizow - Friday, December 5, 2008 - link
I've felt the motherboard industry has been the weakest link in the PC industry for a very long time. I'm really glad someone finally called them out on it.I used to get REALLY upset at AT reviews because they'd publish a review making it seem these boards are rock solid stable with insane overclocking ability only to learn the ugly truth once I got the board home. It wouldn't take long to confirm it with other reports of underwhelming performance totally out of line with various reviews.
BIOS stability and quality certainly needs to improve, especially if board makers want to charge such insane prices for something that has always seemed low-end and interchangeable. Its probably a good thing that the market for mobo makers has shrunk, now they can focus on quality and add some value by making these things last longer than 6-9 months.
haukionkannel - Friday, December 5, 2008 - link
When I bought last time purhaced new PC. It had vorce USB support that I can imagine. Every time I put an new USB devile like USB stick, the computer freeces down after short or long period of time... Ower the years situation got better and better. But It reguired a lot of installing of new versions of Bios... And yeh, it was expensive motherboard from big maker.I am allmost somewhat customed to that the computer does not properly... and that is something that is not right! It should work better from the beginning.
Maybe we need some form of ISO standard for new mother board:
When these and these things works. You can start selling these items and review sites starts makin revies of them. Prewievs and beta programs are different story all to gether, but final product shoulf be better.
Now we only need a forum where to make that standard. I am quite sure that testers are even more frustracted with stupid errors they encounter than I who has never been "huge" over clocker.
- - - - - -
1) The machine must works with all specified memory configurations
2) Informed normal speeds should work with all integrated parts
3) the machine should be stable enough to run 24 hours burn test with adverticed speed specifications.
4) If you allso overclock it 10-20% That is good extra, but I expect more of these after more mature bios.
This list is not accurate enough, but somekind od insurance is needed! I Thank you for your hard work. For normal user these test you make are the only way of getting to know who can still make desent bios and who can not!
karhill - Friday, December 5, 2008 - link
"Catering or focusing exclusively to the extreme overclocking community has resulted in initial product launches that are focused on getting the highest possible results from a product at the expense of usability, compatibility, and stability."EXACTLY. Board stability and features that work are SO MUCH MORE IMPORTANT to me than overclocking. When I buy a board, that's what I'm looking for: stablity and features that work. Any consideration of overclocking is simply as an indicator for the qualities that matter to me; that is, I figure if board overclocks well, then it ought to be extra stable at stock speeds.
TennesseeTony - Friday, December 5, 2008 - link
The ASUS P6T Deluxe sounds exactly like what you've been describing. Screw 12GB of RAM, I can't get six 1GB sticks of OCZ-1333 to boot/post. 3GB great. 4GB, fine, no problem. 5GB, yep, works just fine. But put that sixth stick of memory in there, in ANY of the slots, and when that little annoying blue led by the mem slot turns on, the computer dies.Vista won't boot on the SAS controller (64bit). ASUS says it's Microsoft's problem, nothing wrong with them... XP64 finally loaded up, I think I'm on Windows installation number 14, still buggy.
I've been quite pissed with Anandtech for not coming through with all the promises of overclocking guides and such, but thank you, Anand, for finally shedding some light on the problems behind the delays, and an extra big thank you for deciding to only give them two strikes, then they're out! It's far past time!
pwndcake - Friday, December 5, 2008 - link
So, the motherboard companies are using yours and other tech sites for free QA testing? Am I reading this right? Not a bad idea really. They don't even have to pay the price of 12GB of RAM to get all the testing and feedback they need.tmath2 - Sunday, October 4, 2009 - link
Hear Hear !!! Call it like you see it! The though had occured to me also that the mob mfr's could save a ton on salaries by out-sourcing the Quality and Assurance departments to AnandTech and other hardware review websites!