DFI NF4 SLI-DR Expert – Can the best get better?
by Randi Sica on November 25, 2005 12:05 PM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
DFI NF4 SLI-DR Expert: Memory Overclocking and Performance Evaluation
Memory and HTT overclocking has been the forte of the previous generation SLI-DR board. The objective of these tests was to determine the clockability of different DDR modules on this improved version. It has been stated that this board is much more module-friendly with a wider variety of RAM types than the original DFI nF4. We tested modules at their specified rating and then increased frequency to the maximum that we could reach. For this test, we used the A64 4000+ CPU using a reduced multipier of 8x to assure CPU stability.It's to be noted that the use of a higher multiplier would indeed increase overall system bandwidth, but for this test we were looking for the highest memory Mhz and the accompanying bandwidth chart is purely for module comparisons at their maximum fequency. Everest version 2.20 was used to evaluate Read, write and latency.
It should be noted that during the course of testing the RAM and pushing the envelope, the shipping BIOS started to become a bit troublesome, certainly pushing RAM to its limits can wreak havoc on operating systems and BIOS' in the form of data corruption. After corrupting the original BIOS, we could not find another 11/2/05 shipping BIOS. As a result, we could only locate an 11/9/05 BIOS that is optimized a bit more than the shipping BIOS. The original BIOS failure was a blessing in disguise as the board and RAM responded in a very positive manner to the new BIOS. All settings in the BIOS were left as programmed except for the CAS Latency, RAS to CAS, RAS Precharge and tRAS, which were set to the highest stable, benchable settings. Due to the time constraints involved in producing this review, little time was afforded to experiment with further optimum settings. Another week of evenings may have allowed the following modules to scale a tad higher.
The new player in the RAM battles was Corsair 3200XL TCCD based modules. Though rated at PC3200, they eventually surpassed the 4000PT and OCZ's PC4800EL coming in at 310Mhz. The BH-5 based Corsair 3200LL, even at 2 years old, did very well - achieving 266Mhz at the tightest timings at 3.6V. An observation to be made, though, is the poor write performance of the BH-5 compared to its TCCD brothers. I also tested 2x256MB BH-5 modules from OCZ and Kingston with much less success, but even at similar speeds, all the BH-5 suffered from this same write fall off in comparison. This may very well be a side effect of a TCCD optimized BIOS, but only with more time to experiment with settings may we have been able to improve the score. That shortfall notwithstanding, the BH-5 clearly can still be called "king of the hill" in the read and latency portion of our evaluation.
All memory module testing was performed with the 4000+. At a future point, we plan to test with the 3500+ Winchester. That CPU had hit a max of 370 MHz 1-1 with 2x256MB modules of G.Skill PC4400LE on the original SLI-D, and results should be very interesting on the updated Expert board.
Memory and HTT overclocking has been the forte of the previous generation SLI-DR board. The objective of these tests was to determine the clockability of different DDR modules on this improved version. It has been stated that this board is much more module-friendly with a wider variety of RAM types than the original DFI nF4. We tested modules at their specified rating and then increased frequency to the maximum that we could reach. For this test, we used the A64 4000+ CPU using a reduced multipier of 8x to assure CPU stability.It's to be noted that the use of a higher multiplier would indeed increase overall system bandwidth, but for this test we were looking for the highest memory Mhz and the accompanying bandwidth chart is purely for module comparisons at their maximum fequency. Everest version 2.20 was used to evaluate Read, write and latency.
It should be noted that during the course of testing the RAM and pushing the envelope, the shipping BIOS started to become a bit troublesome, certainly pushing RAM to its limits can wreak havoc on operating systems and BIOS' in the form of data corruption. After corrupting the original BIOS, we could not find another 11/2/05 shipping BIOS. As a result, we could only locate an 11/9/05 BIOS that is optimized a bit more than the shipping BIOS. The original BIOS failure was a blessing in disguise as the board and RAM responded in a very positive manner to the new BIOS. All settings in the BIOS were left as programmed except for the CAS Latency, RAS to CAS, RAS Precharge and tRAS, which were set to the highest stable, benchable settings. Due to the time constraints involved in producing this review, little time was afforded to experiment with further optimum settings. Another week of evenings may have allowed the following modules to scale a tad higher.
NOTE 11/23/05: There is now a shipping BIOS listed at DFI's site for the Expert, along with a newer beta bios.
| Modules | Maximum clock | Read mb/s | Write mb/s | Latency |
| 2x256MB Corsair CMX256A-3200LL BH-5 | 266Mhz @ 3.6v 2-2-2-5 1T |
7255 | 2108 | 35.9ns |
| 2x512MB Corsair CMX512-3200XL TCCD | 310Mhz@ 3.1V 3-4-4-8 1T |
7011 | 3042 | 38.5ns |
| 2x1GB Corsair CMX1024 4000PT | 300Mhz @ 3.1V 3-4-4-8 1T |
6703 | 2686 | 40.4ns |
| 2x512MB OCZ PC4800EL Elite Platinum Ed. TCCD | 300Mhz @ 2.96V 2.5-3-3-8 1T |
6991 | 2950 | 39.6ns |
The new player in the RAM battles was Corsair 3200XL TCCD based modules. Though rated at PC3200, they eventually surpassed the 4000PT and OCZ's PC4800EL coming in at 310Mhz. The BH-5 based Corsair 3200LL, even at 2 years old, did very well - achieving 266Mhz at the tightest timings at 3.6V. An observation to be made, though, is the poor write performance of the BH-5 compared to its TCCD brothers. I also tested 2x256MB BH-5 modules from OCZ and Kingston with much less success, but even at similar speeds, all the BH-5 suffered from this same write fall off in comparison. This may very well be a side effect of a TCCD optimized BIOS, but only with more time to experiment with settings may we have been able to improve the score. That shortfall notwithstanding, the BH-5 clearly can still be called "king of the hill" in the read and latency portion of our evaluation.
All memory module testing was performed with the 4000+. At a future point, we plan to test with the 3500+ Winchester. That CPU had hit a max of 370 MHz 1-1 with 2x256MB modules of G.Skill PC4400LE on the original SLI-D, and results should be very interesting on the updated Expert board.
DFI NF4 SLI-DR Expert: Memory Stress Testing
DFI NFR SLI-DR Expert – Overclocked 3D benchmark performance + SLI verification
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
40 Comments
View All Comments
karioskasra - Saturday, November 26, 2005 - link
Agreed. The nb fan on the dfi sounds like a cat getting mauled. It's enough to make you go water just for the quiet.karioskasra - Saturday, November 26, 2005 - link
I'm calling for dual cores to be included in the standard test setup.Bozo Galora - Saturday, November 26, 2005 - link
newegg has them in stock - 2 billsdecptt - Friday, November 25, 2005 - link
I wanna ask the author.Have you tested 4x1GB yet?
Can it see 4GB or can't it?
What timing do you use?
RSica - Saturday, November 26, 2005 - link
I did not test with 4x 1GB sticks because I only have 2 in my possession for reviewing. I did in fact as mentioned run 4x512MB sticks at 2T with no problem whatsover for testing.Future reviews will very well see x2 A64's included but I'm not sure what the timetable will be for their inclusion.
Again, thank you for your comments !
Randi
cryptonomicon - Saturday, November 26, 2005 - link
i think the article said that it couldn't pass 1T for 4x1gb, but it can run it (at 2t).SignalPST - Friday, November 25, 2005 - link
Thanks Randi for the very detailed review of the Expert.I was wondering, with the new layout of the RAM slots and CPU, is it possible to populate all 4 RAM slots and still be able to fit the thermalright XP-120 without problems?
tjr508 - Friday, November 25, 2005 - link
Bravo to DFI for using decent power supplies and such, but why is the SIL 3114 such a dissapointment? Does any desktop user need SATA2 at this time? Does anyone need DDR2 as opposed to high quality DDR (not this board but in a couple months). This whole idea of "futureproofing" drives me crazy. It may be nice if people saw mobos they liked and baught them to keep them in a closet for a couple years, but I believe most people buy their systems within a week or so. I can understand buying a 3000+ and maybe sticking in a $30 fx57 in three or four years, but you can do that with any board on the market pretty much. Adopting future standards before they can provide reasonable performance improvements will alter your financial experience far more than your computing experience. Then again I would have to blame the consumers more so than the companies as their tactics are obviously making them money. I would love to know how many SLI boards out there have one video card attached to them as well as how many unsued SATA channels there are out there. I just think it is dissapointing that in today's market its hard to find an extra feature you want without paying for five more that you don't.Tanclearas - Friday, November 25, 2005 - link
I had to double-check that I was indeed still reading a review at Anandtech.Since when is the max FSB of a motherboard determined using any memory ratio other than 1:1?
How many other boards reviewed at AT were booted into Windows at a certain FSB before being cranked up?
Why the change in CPU from previous tests (using a 3500 rather than 4000)?
What is with the graph for Futuremark that compares the different component scores of the same board? What is the point of graphing those numbers?
Where is the comparison to the A8N32-SLI? I'm pretty sure that's the benchmark board right now for enthusiasts.
I didn't even finish reading the review.
RSica - Friday, November 25, 2005 - link
Good Morning :)_The object of the testing was to not only find the max 1:1 clockability of the board (310Mhz), but to find it's ability to reach the HTT limits of 2 different CPU's in our possession which certainly necessitates using a divider.
-This board booted into Windows at 510Mhz HTT. Having come from an extensive overclocking background, it is recognized that the fact a board will not boot into Windows at a specified speed does not necessarily mean the board/CPU will not function at an increased HTT speed. In this case, to determine the maximum HTT the Expert and 3500+ Winchester could attain the use of the Popular overclocking program ClockGen, and it only resulted in an additional 2Mhz HTT.
There are many readers that indeed take great interest in the overall top HTT overclockability of a board.
- The change in CPU's was merely to find the boards ability to overclock the HTT to it's maximum. This gem of a 3500+ was known to have reached an HTT of 500Mhz previously. The 4000+ has a maximum HTT of 400Mhz. Of course for all tests other than the Extreme Overclocking section, the 4000+ was utilized fror straight up comparisons.
-I have updated the gaming performance graphs which includes comparison to the A8N32-SLI
I'll update the other graphs as time allows.
I thank you wholeheartedly for your comments, Randi :)