Conroe Buying Guide: Feeding the Monster
by Gary Key & Wesley Fink on July 19, 2006 6:20 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Test Setup
Test conditions were maintained the same, as much as possible, over the platforms tested. For better comparison standard test results (1280x1024) were run with a single NVIDIA 7900GTX on all platforms. A single ATI X1900XTX was also tested at standard resolutions on the Intel 975X boards which support CrossFire. Consider this result a sanity check for single card performance and CrossFire. It should not be directly compared to other test results. Since SLI and CrossFire are not yet interchangeable, 1600x1200 4xAA/8xAF SLI was run on the single NVIDIA-based board with a pair of 7900GTX cards. 1600X1200 4xAA/8xAF CrossFire was run on the Intel 975X boards using a Master+Standard X1900XT CrossFire setup. All results are reported in our charts and color-coded for easier identification of results.
All Core 2 Duo benchmarking used Corsair PC2-8500 (DDR2-1066) 2GB kit at 3-3-3 timings at 2.2V. In recent months the memory market has moved from a 1GB kit to a 2GB kit being the common memory configuration. Our new DDR2 test standard is 2GB.
| Performance Test Configuration | |
| Processor | Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 (X2, 2.67GHz, 4MB Unified Cache) |
| RAM | 2 x 1GB Corsair Twin2X2048-8500C5 Tested at DDR2-800 3-3-3 2.2V |
| Hard Drive(s) | Hitachi 250GB SATA2 enabled (16MB Buffer) |
| System Platform Drivers | Intel - 8.0.1.1002 NVIDIA - 6.86 |
| Video Cards: | 1 x EVGA 7900GTX - All Standard Tests 2 x EVGA 7900GTX - SLI on NVIDIA 1 x ATI X1900XTX - ATI Standard Tests on Intel 2 x ATI X1900XT (Master+Standard) - CrossFire on Intel |
| Video Drivers: | NVIDIA 91.31 ATI Catalyst 6.6 |
| CPU Cooling: | Tuniq Tower 120 |
| Power Supply: | OCZ GameXstream 700W |
| Motherboards: | ASUS P5W-DH Deluxe (Intel 975X) Intel 975XBX (Intel 975X) ASUS P5B Deluxe (Intel P965) ASUS P5N32-SLI (nF4 SLIX16 Intel) Biostar TForce P965 Deluxe (Intel P965) Gigabyte GA-965P-DQ6 (Intel P965) DFI Infinity 975X/G (Intel 975X) ASRock 775Dual-VSTA (VIA PT880 PRO) |
| Operating System(s): | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
Test conditions were maintained the same, as much as possible, over the platforms tested. For better comparison standard test results (1280x1024) were run with a single NVIDIA 7900GTX on all platforms. A single ATI X1900XTX was also tested at standard resolutions on the Intel 975X boards which support CrossFire. Consider this result a sanity check for single card performance and CrossFire. It should not be directly compared to other test results. Since SLI and CrossFire are not yet interchangeable, 1600x1200 4xAA/8xAF SLI was run on the single NVIDIA-based board with a pair of 7900GTX cards. 1600X1200 4xAA/8xAF CrossFire was run on the Intel 975X boards using a Master+Standard X1900XT CrossFire setup. All results are reported in our charts and color-coded for easier identification of results.
All Core 2 Duo benchmarking used Corsair PC2-8500 (DDR2-1066) 2GB kit at 3-3-3 timings at 2.2V. In recent months the memory market has moved from a 1GB kit to a 2GB kit being the common memory configuration. Our new DDR2 test standard is 2GB.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
123 Comments
View All Comments
Beaner - Wednesday, July 19, 2006 - link
Very well-written article guys!Thanks for taking the time to enlighten us all.
Just wanted to point out that the Mushkin Redline sticks can be had right now for $355 AR. At that price, I may just have to grab 'em myself!
ChronoReverse - Wednesday, July 19, 2006 - link
It was pretty much shown that the effect of using memory dividers for Athlon64's was rather minimal while most dividers were more adverse for Netburst.How large of an effect does using memory dividers have on the Conroe?
Wesley Fink - Wednesday, July 19, 2006 - link
The effect of memory dividers is much smaller on Conroe than we saw on Netburst. In fact memory dividers on Conroe behave more like AM2 - probably the result of the "apparent" reduction in latency with the intelligent look-ahead in memory. Core 2 Duo is not Hyper-Transport, so 1:1 (533) tis still theoretically the highest performing setting, but we were hard pressed to find any measurable advantage of 1:1 in most situations.We had tested a number of high-performance dimms on Conroe before we wrote the Buyers Guide, but there just wasn't the time - or room - to include full memory performance data in the Guide. We do have memory reviews in process that will provide specifics to your questions.
We can summarize what we have learned about memory on Conroe so far. DDR2-667 is quite a bit higher in real perfomance than DDR2-400 or DDR2-533 (1:1). We would consider DDR2 to be the minimum memory that should be used with Conroe. Going up from DDR2-667 we found the following - from fastest to DDR2-667. DDR2-1067 4-4-4 is a bit faster than DDR2-800 3-3-3 is a bit faster than DDR2-667 3-2-3. Timings are very important above DDR2-667 and you can give up any performance advantage with slower timings. DDR2-667 is a good match to COnroe bandwidth, and is better perfoming than 533 or 400 by a wider marging than you find above DDR2-667. It also appears Conroe responds better (performs better with increases) to DDR2 bandwidth increases than either Netburst or AM2.
Wesley Fink - Wednesday, July 19, 2006 - link
We would consider DDR2-667 the minimum memory to use with Conroe, and faster timings do generally improve performance.Sunrise089 - Wednesday, July 19, 2006 - link
I would like to know this as well.txt2000 - Wednesday, July 19, 2006 - link
Just wondering, if your going to spend ~$400 on memory if you would be better off with 4GB value DDR or 2GB high performance.Patsoe - Wednesday, July 19, 2006 - link
I suppose that completely depends on your usage pattern. Almost all of my activities fit within 512MB, and probably anything I do fits within 768MB. So getting faster RAM would do more for me than more of it.If you could fill 3GB, then a setup with 2GB will see a lot hard-disk swapping... even a very slow 4GB of RAM will do better in that case.
Andy4504 - Wednesday, July 19, 2006 - link
Anything over 1GB results in the OS addressing your memory differently. Never did the reasearch on how that different addressing affected system performance however.supremelaw - Wednesday, July 19, 2006 - link
http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2797&am...">http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2797&am...Timing and content were perfect for this article.
And, your earlier article on the nVidia 590 chipset
for Intel also dovetails perfectly: nice photos too.
August+ should be VERY interesting.
Many thanks!
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell
Webmaster, Supreme Law Library
http://www.supremelaw.org/">http://www.supremelaw.org/
mobutu - Wednesday, July 19, 2006 - link
"The board was very stable with our X6800 and X6600 Core 2 Duo processors ..."It should have been E6700 (or maybe E6700)