Intel 925X Roundup: Creative Engineering 101
by Wesley Fink on August 12, 2004 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Foxconn 925A01: Features and Layout
| Foxconn 925A01 Motherboard Specifications | |
| CPU Interface | Socket 775 Pentium 4 (Prescott) |
| Chipset | Intel 925X/ICH6R |
| Bus Speeds | 200MHz to 350MHz (in 1MHz increments) |
| PCI Speeds | 33.33, 36.36, 40.00, Ref PCIex |
| PCI Express Speeds | 100MHz to 200MHz in 1MHz increments |
| DDR2 Speeds | Auto, 400, 533 |
| Core Voltage | +.0125V to +.1875V in 0.0125V increments |
| DRAM Voltage | +.03V, +.06V, +.10V |
| System Core Voltage | +.03V, +.06V, +.10V |
| Memory Slots | Four 240-pin DDR2 Slots Dual-Channel Unbuffered Memory to 4GB |
| Expansion Slots | 1 PCIe x16 Slot 2 PCIe x1 slot 3 PCI Slots |
| Onboard SATA/IDE RAID | 4 SATA 150 drives by ICH6R Can be combined in RAID 0,1,Intel Matrix |
| Onboard IDE | One Standard ATA100/66 (2 drives) |
| Onboard USB 2.0/IEEE-1394 | 8 USB 2.0 ports 2 IEEE 1394a FireWire Ports by VIA VT6307 |
| Onboard LAN | Gigabit Ethernet by Realtek 8110S-32 |
| Onboard Audio | Realtek ALC880 8-Channel with SPDIF |
| Tested BIOS | 3C1XP216 |
The only Foxconn boards that we have tested so far have been value boards, and Foxconn has earned a reputation of building solid motherboards that represent very good value. The Foxconn 925A01 is a different type of motherboard for Foxconn, since the 925X chipset is Intel's premium chipset no matter how you approach it. This is also reflected in the fact that while almost everyone offers a 915 "mainstream" motherboard, only five manufacturers so far are shipping 925X motherboards.
Foxconn has positioned the 925A01 at the value end of the 925X curve. It costs a little more than the Abit AA8, but it is a lot less expensive than either the Asus P5AD2 Premium or the Gigabyte GA-8ANXP-D. Foxconn did not cut corners, however, as the 925X-A01 fully implements the 925X feature-set all the way down to the Intel HD audio. It appears that Foxconn's fist intent was to produce a board that would compete with the Intel motherboards in the marketplace, since the Foxconn was lacking in almost all the overclocking features that the other boards in this roundup possess. However, Foxconn quickly provided an updated BIOS that significantly improved on the BIOS adjustments available on the Foxconn.
That is not to say that the Foxconn is a board that the enthusiast will seek out. With the latest BIOS, the Foxconn has a very complete selection of CPU voltage adjustments and the CPU clock is adjustable over a very acceptable range from 200 to 350, but the memory voltage adjustments are extremely anemic, topping out at 1.9V from a starting point of 1.8V. The same can be said for the Northbridge voltage adjustments; though, we are pleased to see Foxconn offer this option in the BIOS. Foxconn says that there is an update to the design in process that will improve the range of memory voltage and Northbridge voltage adjustments. Those changes will bring Foxconn much more into line with the other top-of-the-line boards in this roundup.
The feature set of the 925A01 is excellent, and will satisfy most users. Foxconn even included the 6 mini-jacks needed for Intel High Definition audio, and Firewire ports for those who prefer that interface. The only weakness in the audio ports is that only an SPDIF coaxial connector is provided on an accessory bracket. There is no provision at all for an optical connector.
All-in-all, the Foxconn is not quite to the level of the other boards in this roundup, but it is surprisingly close. It also excels in the most important quality of all; it is rock solid no matter what we threw at it. With the coming update, the 925A01 should prove very competitive with the other boards in this roundup.
Layout of the Foxconn 925A01 is among the better layouts in the roundup. Both the floppy and IDE connectors are in the preferred upper right edge location where they work best for most cases. The bulky 24-pin connector is at the top right edge, which is probably the best location that you could find on a board. The 24-pin is out of the way of other cables, which is what you want in a good board design. The 4-in 12 volt is near the center of the board on the left side of the CPU, which is not the best location because it requires snaking the cable around the CPU. However, it is easier to fish a 4-in cable than the bulky 24-pin.
There is one other concern in the Foxconn layout. It seems that there is trend to provide just a 2-pin connector for the power LED these days, but many power supplies still are equipped with the 3-pin connector. You can do a little surgery on the connector, since there are just 2 active pins. Other boards provide both 2-pin and 3-pin power LED connectors, but the 925A01 has just the 2-pin connector. For those of you with a 3-pin power LED, your only option on the Foxconn is to modify your cable or leave the power LED not connected.
Nitpicks aside, there really is little to complain about in the Foxconn board layout. We mounted all 5 of the boards in a typical mid-tower case just to see how the layout worked and the Foxconn was an easier layout to work with than either the Abit or the DFI.
DFI LANParty 925X-T2: Overclocking and Stress Testing
Foxconn 925A01: Overclocking and Stress Testing
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
30 Comments
View All Comments
JustAnAverageGuy - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link
On the Gigabyte 8ANXP-D:Page 10
Memory Slots Four 240-pin DDR2 Slots
Gigabyte provides 6 DIMM slots, but the total memory and number of sides that can be used is the same as the other boards in the roundup.
JustAnAverageGuy - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link
Typo page 5:"The memory stress test measures the ability of the Abit AA8 to"
should read Asus P5AD2. :)
only on page 5, may be more.
l3ored - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link
allright, point taken. howabout testing lower lga775 cpus and combining the results with 939 scores?Wesley Fink - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link
#5 - You're welcome.We also ran and reported the rest of our standard motherboard tests, which included Business and Multimedia Content Creation Winstones and Media encoding (which Intel won by a small margin).
As we stated in the review the only reason we did not include our standard SPECviewperf 7.1.1 benchmarks is because we have seen variations of up to 100% in SPECviewperf results with certain 925X boards. We don't believe these results are real, and we are trying to find answers for these variations in benchmark results. Until we find some answers, publishing the workstation benchmark results would not really reveal anything about the performance of the 925X boards we are testing.
The FX53, Intel 925X, and Intel 915 results are included for reference and completeness. We are comparing five 925X motherboards in performance, and we do not mean to detract from that comparison with AMD Socket 939 benchmarks. Please consider the 939 results to be a frame of reference.
AnnoyedGrunt - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link
From what I can see, the P4 560 is about $750, so that puts it right between the 3800+ (about $650) and the FX-53 (about $850) in price. It would be nice to add the 3800+ scores (if you have any) to that review just so we could see how the price/performance of the 560, 3800+, and FX-53 compare.-D'oh!
Shimmishim - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link
#2 - Achieving a 4 ghz overclock on a pentium is nothing to sneeze at... i think 3.8 may be possible on air but 4.2 is really pushing.As much as a lot of us would love to see overclocked processor results, i think it's best that they only show stock clock results as they are easier to compare...
#3 - Its hard to say how fair it is to use a FX-53 against the 3.6 ghz 775 chip... but if you think about it, they are comparing the top end pentium 775 skt (new pin count) vs. the top of the line A64 939 skt (new pin count)..
Both are also 1 megs of L2 even though the extra cache doesn't help the A64 greatly.
Maybe a 3800+ would have been better comparison but i think he was trying to make things as easy to compare as possible...
Even if he had used a 3800+ or even a 3700+ i don't think the gaming results would have been that much different... we all know that the A64's dominate in gaming.
maybe some more tests besides gaming would have been better...
but all in all...
thank you Wes for a good article!
Wesley Fink - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link
#3 - The 3.6 is the fastest Intel processor. If you will check our launch reviews you will see the 3.6 outperformed the 3.4EE. We are indeed comparing the best performing Intel - the 3.6 - to the best performing AMD - FX53.Prior to the 3.6, the 3.4EE was the fastest Intel CPU.
l3ored - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link
lately i've been noticing unfair comparisons between intel and amd, in this article, high end processors are being compared with the top of the line from amd. this isnt really helpful to anyone, so please go back to the old anandtech way.Anemone - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link
Nice article !If I could have had one extra wish it would have been to show a set of test charts with a moderate oc on them, think that would put the FX @ 2.6-2.7 and the P4 560's @ 4.2-4.3.
If the boards can overclock, and the 939's can too, where does it all land for those using just normal or at most water oc'ing.
No worry, these wishes do not detract from a very nice article.
Thank you
stickybytes - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link
Nice to see asus get a award but unfourtanetly the word "prescott" mentioned in any sentence will probably scare away 80% of AT'ers.