Conroe Buying Guide: Feeding the Monster
by Gary Key & Wesley Fink on July 19, 2006 6:20 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Biostar TForce P965 Deluxe
Basic Features
Biostar has delivered a basic but performance oriented P965 board that should sell for around US $135 or under. While our board and BIOS are from the first production run, we were surprised after dealing with our other P965 based boards at how stable and generally dialed in this board is right now. Although we certainly believe that future BIOS releases will extract additional performance from this board, it was nice to boot up this board and have it just plain work as advertised. This board did not require a BIOS of the day or week to work with various Conroe steppings or to address memory performance and stability issues.
The layout of the board is very nice with a double slot next to the PCIe X16 connector that allows the use of dual slot GPU cards without losing either a PCIe or PCI connector. We think Biostar provided the right combination of PCIe and PCI slots for today's market considerations. While the 24-pin ATX power connection is in an awkward position, Biostar stated this was the best possible location for stable power delivery, and we are seeing this location utilized more and more on other P965 and 975X boards now. The floppy drive connector is also located at the opposite end of the board and for those still using this type of drive it will create a cabling issue. Overall, we like the general layout and options on this board.
Basic Performance
The performance of the board was at times in the upper segment of our roundup and at others near the bottom when excluding the ASRock value board. We found the board to be a very consistent performer and extremely stable up to its limit. Unfortunately, we do not know what the true limit of this board will be until we see further BIOS optimizations and improvements in the memory voltages. As with recent Biostar boards in the new TForce series, we see significant BIOS options available for the performance oriented crowd yet they have once again let us down on memory voltages.
This board only supports up to 2.2V and only allows four total memory voltage choices. Without additional memory voltages up to 2.4V that we see in the majority of boards being released at this time, it was impossible to really push our memory and improve the overall performance of the board when overclocking. We once again contacted Biostar and chastised them for this omission. One could argue that a board in this market sector would probably not require higher memory voltages but a board being marketed for the performance user should include voltages up to 2.4V along with additional adjustments. The balance of the BIOS is obviously tailored for this type of user and unlike others we have tested this BIOS was stable and almost error free for a first release.
We still believe overall that this board is a great value at this time and offers what appears to be the best blend of performance and price in our roundup. While Gigabyte, Foxconn, ECS, Abit, and others have released or are in the process of releasing mainstream P965 boards, we congratulate Biostar for having a board of this quality available quickly.
Overclocking
We were quite surprised by our overclocking results on this board but we did have to gradually increase the FSB speeds and alter the memory settings in order to reach this level. While this is generally indicative of a board at its limits, we believe part of the hunt and search activities that were required are due to a BIOS designed for stability/compatibility first with hopefully the inevitable performance tuning coming in the next revision.
When we installed our X6800 and started testing for maximum FSB overclocking we were treated with a 9x379 result that indicates additional headroom is available on this board and hopefully the board will reward us with higher overclocks in the next BIOS revision, so we might find the true FSB ceiling on the board to be near 380.
Basic Features
| Biostar TForce P965 Deluxe | |
| Market Segment: | Mid-Range/Performance |
| CPU Interface: | Socket T (Socket 775) |
| CPU Support: | LGA775-based Pentium 4, Celeron D, Pentium D, Core 2 Duo |
| Chipset: | Intel P965 + ICH8R |
| Bus Speeds: | 266 to 500 in 1MHz Increments |
| Memory Speeds: | Auto, 533, 667, 800 |
| PCIe Speeds: | Auto, CPU, Fixed at 100MHz, 100MHz~200MHz |
| PCI: | Fixed at 33 |
| Dynamic Tuning: | V6 Tech - 10%~15% V8 Tech - 15%~25% V12 Tech - 25%~30% |
| Core Voltage: | Startup, 1.10000V to 1.80000V in 0.00625V increments |
| CPU Clock Multiplier: | Auto, 6x-11x in 1X increments if CPU is unlocked |
| DRAM Voltage: | 1.8V, 2.0V, 2.1V, 2.2V |
| DRAM Timing Control: | SPD, 8 Options |
| FSB Termination Voltage: | Auto, 1.2V, 1.3V, 1.4V, 1.5V |
| NB/SB Voltage: | Auto,1.5V, 1.6V, 1.7V, 1.8V |
| Memory Slots: | Four 240-pin DDR2 DIMM Slots Dual-Channel Configuration Regular Unbuffered Memory to 8GB Total |
| Expansion Slots: | 1 - PCIe X16 1 - PCIe X4 1 - PCIe X1 3 - PCI Slots 2.3 |
| Onboard SATA/RAID: | 6 SATA 3Gbps Ports - Intel ICH8R (RAID 0,1,1+0,5,JBOD) |
| Onboard IDE: | 1 Standard ATA133/100/66/33 Port (2 drives) VIA VT6410 |
| Onboard USB 2.0/IEEE-1394: | 10 USB 2.0 Ports - 6 I/O Panel 4 Headers No Firewire Support |
| Onboard LAN: | Gigabit Ethernet Controller Realtek RTL 8110SC |
| Onboard Audio: | Realtek ALC883 HD-Audio 8-channel CODEC |
| Power Connectors: | ATX 24-pin, 4-pin EATX 12V |
| I/O Panel: | 1 x Serial 1 x PS/2 Keyboard 1 x PS/2 Mouse 1 x RJ45 6 x USB 2.0/1.1 8-Channel Audio I/O |
| BIOS Revision: | AWARD ip96a614 |
Biostar has delivered a basic but performance oriented P965 board that should sell for around US $135 or under. While our board and BIOS are from the first production run, we were surprised after dealing with our other P965 based boards at how stable and generally dialed in this board is right now. Although we certainly believe that future BIOS releases will extract additional performance from this board, it was nice to boot up this board and have it just plain work as advertised. This board did not require a BIOS of the day or week to work with various Conroe steppings or to address memory performance and stability issues.
 |
| Click to enlarge |
The layout of the board is very nice with a double slot next to the PCIe X16 connector that allows the use of dual slot GPU cards without losing either a PCIe or PCI connector. We think Biostar provided the right combination of PCIe and PCI slots for today's market considerations. While the 24-pin ATX power connection is in an awkward position, Biostar stated this was the best possible location for stable power delivery, and we are seeing this location utilized more and more on other P965 and 975X boards now. The floppy drive connector is also located at the opposite end of the board and for those still using this type of drive it will create a cabling issue. Overall, we like the general layout and options on this board.
Basic Performance
The performance of the board was at times in the upper segment of our roundup and at others near the bottom when excluding the ASRock value board. We found the board to be a very consistent performer and extremely stable up to its limit. Unfortunately, we do not know what the true limit of this board will be until we see further BIOS optimizations and improvements in the memory voltages. As with recent Biostar boards in the new TForce series, we see significant BIOS options available for the performance oriented crowd yet they have once again let us down on memory voltages.
This board only supports up to 2.2V and only allows four total memory voltage choices. Without additional memory voltages up to 2.4V that we see in the majority of boards being released at this time, it was impossible to really push our memory and improve the overall performance of the board when overclocking. We once again contacted Biostar and chastised them for this omission. One could argue that a board in this market sector would probably not require higher memory voltages but a board being marketed for the performance user should include voltages up to 2.4V along with additional adjustments. The balance of the BIOS is obviously tailored for this type of user and unlike others we have tested this BIOS was stable and almost error free for a first release.
We still believe overall that this board is a great value at this time and offers what appears to be the best blend of performance and price in our roundup. While Gigabyte, Foxconn, ECS, Abit, and others have released or are in the process of releasing mainstream P965 boards, we congratulate Biostar for having a board of this quality available quickly.
Overclocking
| Biostar TForce P965 Deluxe Overclocking Testbed |
|
| Processor: | Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 Dual Core, 2.67GHz, 4MB Unified Cache 1066FSB, 10x Multiplier |
| CPU Voltage: | 1.525V (default 1.2V) |
| Cooling: | Tuniq Tower 120 Air Cooling |
| Power Supply: | OCZ GameXStream 700W |
| Memory: | Corsair Twin2X2048-PC2-8500C5 (2x1GB) (Micron Memory Chips) |
| Hard Drive | Hitachi 250GB 7200RPM SATA2 16MB Cache |
| Maximum OC: (Standard Ratio) |
364x10 (3-3-3-9) 3640MHz (+36%) |
We were quite surprised by our overclocking results on this board but we did have to gradually increase the FSB speeds and alter the memory settings in order to reach this level. While this is generally indicative of a board at its limits, we believe part of the hunt and search activities that were required are due to a BIOS designed for stability/compatibility first with hopefully the inevitable performance tuning coming in the next revision.
When we installed our X6800 and started testing for maximum FSB overclocking we were treated with a 9x379 result that indicates additional headroom is available on this board and hopefully the board will reward us with higher overclocks in the next BIOS revision, so we might find the true FSB ceiling on the board to be near 380.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
123 Comments
View All Comments
Bochista - Thursday, July 20, 2006 - link
With the release of new Quad SLI beta drivers I would like to know what board is compatible with both the Conroe & Quad SLI. Being CPU bound in graphics I think it would very interesting to see. The ASUS P5N32-SLI SE is not on the Quad-SLI list. The Asus P5N32-SLI Deluxe is not either.Bo
Gary Key - Thursday, July 20, 2006 - link
It should be on the list shortly. This is the board that NVIDIA has been using to test and display Quad SLI on with Conroe. We also understand this board will probably make its way into several Quad SLI systems according to NVIDIA. It will be interesting to see how this board performs against the nF590 in a couple of weeks. ;-)
jonmcguffin - Thursday, July 20, 2006 - link
If Core 2 Duo is sucking up so much less energy, why have I not heard anything about the need to NOT buy the 500-650 watt power supplies. It would seem to me that a processor and mainboard that consumers so little power would not need anything more than a good 350 or 400 watt power supply, even in an SLI configuration.It would be nice to see something written up in your review that stated...
Hey, these processors are going to require X amount of power on the lower end and X amount on the higher end. Given power supplies are typically only 75-80% efficient and leaving another 10-15% left over in overhead, you should be using power supplies with a watt rating of X.
Jon
Gary Key - Thursday, July 20, 2006 - link
Jon,Anand went over the power requirements in the CPU review article. However, from a platform level the current 7900GTX and X1900XT cards in SLI or Crossfire will require a very good 500+ watt (on the edge with CrossFire) power supply with Conroe, AM2, or Netburst CPUs. In fact, we highly recommend and use 700+ watt machines in our systems to ensure proper power delivery when running SLI or CrossFire while overclocking. The power requirements of the next generation GPUs for SLI or CrossFire will require 700w power supplies and we generally will see 900+ watt supplies for those who expect to overclock both the CPU and GPU. While we have seen the CPUs reduce their power requirements over the last two years (except at the high end until Conroe, AM2 EE is great), the GPU requirements along with the platform chipsets (ATI RD580 is the exception currently) have sky rocketed. By the time you add a couple of large hard drives, optical drives, SLI or Crossfire, and a FX60 or 955XE, you are already limited by the typical 400~500 watt power supply. While Conroe will make a difference compared to most Netburst based CPUs and the upper end AM2 processor series, it is not enough to even think about dropping below 500w at this time. In my personal systems, the first item I budget for is a really good power supply, never skimp on proper rail voltages and quality, it is the basis for a trouble free system.
Hope this helps....
ninethirty - Friday, July 21, 2006 - link
Would you guys mind doing some tests to back that up in Part 2? Reading SilentPCReview.com, there's some pretty convincing arguments that the need for higher wattage is overblown. And 900W+ is hard to believe...pretty soon you'll be talking about dedicated wall sockets.I think most folks are talking about one video card, not SLI. I'd like to issue a challenge: try a test with the Core 2 Duo, a Geforce 7600GT like in the "Building a Better Budget PC" article, and a 300W Seasonic PSU (or any 80% efficient, true-to-ratings). Then, see how it effects overclocking. That PSU can run an AMD64 x2 3800+ and a 7900GT, why couldn't it run the Core 2 Duo with voltage to spare?
There, I've thrown in my gauntlet.
jonmcguffin - Thursday, July 20, 2006 - link
#1) Paul - My point in bringing up the Digital Thermal Sensor capability of the Core 2 Duo chip and it's "possible" support on the P965 was mainly just to show that there may in fact be certain features the P965 has that are superior to the 975X. Certainly not planning any extreme overclocking and a good HSF is certainly a priority, but still utilizing the Core 2 Duo chip to its fullest abilities is important to me and that means a motherboard that supports this Core 2 Duo feature. If P965 boards support this feature out of the box and the 975X boards don’t, it’s a factor that could play into my purchasing decision.#2) Thanks Gary & Wesley for the explanation on why you didn't include the AB9 Pro motherboard. That makes perfect sense. It seems to me this is the board to target but to be at this point in the game and NOT have a mature enough BIOS to manipulate RAM settings is a little concerning to me. This coupled with Abit's financial issue's in the past almost have me fearful of taking a chance on this board.
I hope in your roundup article you will provide some insight into all this business with 12-phase power and solid state capacitors. What does this mean to the over clocker or the serious workstation user?
Lastly.......
Slightly off-topic here but PERHAPS something you two could include in your more extensive roundup of the next Core 2 Duo motherboards or maybe in a separate article.
On-Board Audio……….
This may be old hat to many here, but this is an issue that I haven't seen addressed anywhere recently. On-Board audio solutions have "evidently" been creaping up on SB products for sometime now. A better explanation as to the feature benefits of some of these on-board solutions (RealTek 882D, 882, 883, 885, 888, ADI, etc) and how they are implemented would be helpful.
#1) Top of this list is the confusion regarding digital audio & HD Audio. Seems every mobo now includes either Optical or Coax digital out on their back plates. What does tihs mean to the gamer, the audio professional, audiophile, or just the everyday computer user who wants to hook up an external amp and some higher end speakers and listen to very high quality stereo music. What the heck is HD Audio and what does that mean? How does it apply to the various groups I mentioned above?
#2 – If I’m going to use the digital out on my board, what difference does it make what onboard or offboard sound solution I use. If the computer is spitting out bit-by-bit digital audio data, isn’t a RealTek ALC650 digital out everybit as good as a Creative Labs SoundBlaster X-Fi Platinum Edition?
#3 – What is the deal with all the new audio codec’s out and their supposed support for Dolby Digital. What does this mean to the consumer? I would imagine 90% of all computer users here and a similar vast majority elsewhere don’t use anything more than a simple 2.1 configuration or perhaps headphones. 7.1 or 7.2 sound is worthless. Does Dolby Digital provide any extra benefits to these 2.1 or headphone listeners? Does it play back my music from .MP3’s or iTunes sound any better?
#4 – What really is EAX and is there that big of a difference between EAX 3.0 – EAX 5.0? And again, how does this relate to digital audio. If some external source is doing the audio conversion, do these technologies even matter?
These may appear to be rather easy questions to answer, but the reality is that we’ve been bombarded so badly with marketing by Creative and others with audio that most of us really don’t know what the heck it is we’re buying.
Personally, the quality of audio output is really important to me. I mostly listen to music and occasionally will play a few games. One BIG question for me is do I save $125 and go with on-board “digital” audio or not.
Thanks!
Jon
Paladin165 - Thursday, July 20, 2006 - link
7.2 sound??ic144 - Thursday, July 20, 2006 - link
Just by looking at this article, you can see how much attention is on Intel's Core 2 Duo. I don't remember so much attention was invested for the AMD Athlon64 FXs when they were launched. LOL.Wesley Fink - Thursday, July 20, 2006 - link
We looked back at the launch review of A64 on Sept. 23, 2003. As you can see for yourself at http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...">http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?... the AMD won Business Winstone and the Intel 3.2 won the MMC Winstone. Gaming results were split, with A64 winning most and the Intel 3.2 winning Quake 3. A64 led in Workstation development and Intel in Encoding. In other words, A64 won by a small margin. The AMD lead grew over time and our coverage continued to grow.We can't remember the last time a new CPU was laucnched that was 20% to 30% faster than the competition in everything we tested. There are really no weaknesses we have found in Core 2 Duo performance. This is a once in a decade event. AMD has responded with massive price cuts that position their new CPUs much more in line with Core 2 Duo based on performance, but they really don't have an answer to conroe, since almost every Conroe chip is faster than the fastest A64. We wish AMD did have a quick fix, since competition is good for buyers.
We are fans of performance at AT, and we have been very supportive of A64 as it took the performance lead and extended it over the past 2+ years. However, those who ignore the current Cnroe advantage are not looking at performance, they are speaking from emotion. Conroe performance can not be ignored or twisted with GPU-bound benchmarks to show show something that is simply not true. Things will likely shift again in the future - AMD has shown itself to be very resilient - and we will loudly proclaim AMD's lead if they regain the performance crown.
MadBoris - Thursday, July 20, 2006 - link
I owe Anandtech much, you guys have consistently provided excellent quality info for years.Thx for another great article, I'm looking forward to part two.
You guys have peaked my curiosity on the tuniq tower. I didn't see it reviewed here yet. Is it that much better than the competition, it's definitely beastly looking?