Intel P965: Mid-Range Performance Sector Roundup
by Gary Key on October 20, 2006 9:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
General System Performance
We devised a script that would compress our standard test folder consisting of 444 files, ten subfolders, and 602MB worth of data, convert a 137MB High Definition QuickTime movie clip to a 37MB MPEG-4 format, play back the first two chapters of OfficeSpace with PowerDVD, and run our AVG anti-virus program in the background. We stop the script when the file compression and video conversion are complete. This is a very taxing script for the CPU, Memory, and Storage subsystem. We also found it to be a good indicator of system stability during our overclocking testing.
The performance difference basically mirrors our PCMark 2005 tests with the ASUS P965 boards scoring about 3% better overall in our multitasking test. While a 3% margin is not earth shattering it does show the ASUS boards are better adept at handling multiple tasks with the P965 chipset. The other P965 motherboards basically scored the same with the ASUS P5NSLI making a decent showing in this test.
PCMark 2005, together with two benchmarks that use rendering to test system performance - Cinebench 9.5 and POV-Ray 3.6 - have replaced the Winstones for testing general performance. Cinebench 9.5 and POV-RAY 3.6 benchmarks both heavily stress the CPU subsystem while performing graphics modeling and rendering. We utilize the standard benchmark demos in each program along with their default settings. Cinebench 9.5 features two different benchmarks with one test utilizing a single core and the second test using the power of multiple cores to render the benchmark image. We utilize the dual core test for our results.
Returning back to normal we see the P965 motherboards grouped closely together and finishing slightly ahead of the 975X and 570SLI offerings. In this case, the Biostar board takes top honors in both tests with the Gigabyte board following closely. These test results bear out our memory test results where the Gigabyte and Biostar boards lead the other boards in our Sandra Unbuffered test results. Our Sandra Unbuffered test results generally inidicate which system will perform best in CPU or Memory intensive tasks.
We devised a script that would compress our standard test folder consisting of 444 files, ten subfolders, and 602MB worth of data, convert a 137MB High Definition QuickTime movie clip to a 37MB MPEG-4 format, play back the first two chapters of OfficeSpace with PowerDVD, and run our AVG anti-virus program in the background. We stop the script when the file compression and video conversion are complete. This is a very taxing script for the CPU, Memory, and Storage subsystem. We also found it to be a good indicator of system stability during our overclocking testing.
The performance difference basically mirrors our PCMark 2005 tests with the ASUS P965 boards scoring about 3% better overall in our multitasking test. While a 3% margin is not earth shattering it does show the ASUS boards are better adept at handling multiple tasks with the P965 chipset. The other P965 motherboards basically scored the same with the ASUS P5NSLI making a decent showing in this test.
PCMark 2005, together with two benchmarks that use rendering to test system performance - Cinebench 9.5 and POV-Ray 3.6 - have replaced the Winstones for testing general performance. Cinebench 9.5 and POV-RAY 3.6 benchmarks both heavily stress the CPU subsystem while performing graphics modeling and rendering. We utilize the standard benchmark demos in each program along with their default settings. Cinebench 9.5 features two different benchmarks with one test utilizing a single core and the second test using the power of multiple cores to render the benchmark image. We utilize the dual core test for our results.
Returning back to normal we see the P965 motherboards grouped closely together and finishing slightly ahead of the 975X and 570SLI offerings. In this case, the Biostar board takes top honors in both tests with the Gigabyte board following closely. These test results bear out our memory test results where the Gigabyte and Biostar boards lead the other boards in our Sandra Unbuffered test results. Our Sandra Unbuffered test results generally inidicate which system will perform best in CPU or Memory intensive tasks.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
62 Comments
View All Comments
vailr - Saturday, October 21, 2006 - link
Re:So, how about the (yet unreleased) ATI and NVidia Conroe chipset boards?
Does either chipset include PATA support?
Thanks.
Gary Key - Saturday, October 21, 2006 - link
They both have native support for two drives.
n7 - Saturday, October 21, 2006 - link
Gary, always love your reviews!I read thru the whole thing, & it was a good read :)
Meticulous detail, as well great sarcastic humor as well.
I look forward to the following parts.
Sho - Friday, October 20, 2006 - link
In an earlier AnandTech article, the one about Kentsfield support, it was written that Gigabyte would bring a revision 2.0 of all of their P965 boards to the market in mid-October, including the DS3. The article does not mention whether the board tested was this new rev 2,9 or any other. Could that be clarified?And does anybody know what was changed/fixed in 2.0?
Gary Key - Friday, October 20, 2006 - link
Gigabyte has not released any further details on the revision 2 boards except for the fact they were addressing some layout issues and possible BIOS improvements. The only major change we could see them making would be going from a three phase power design on the DS3 to a five phase system as an example. The board we tested is still revision 1.Sho - Saturday, October 21, 2006 - link
Thanks!dreddly - Friday, October 20, 2006 - link
'caliper' should be caliber on AB9Pro pageGreat work on this roundup though, impressive job.
Puddyglum1 - Friday, October 20, 2006 - link
Which board? The topic of the previous page was about sound cards vs. onboard audio. Is there a missing page? Why is there a picture of the Asus heatsink and no mention of which board is the preferred of the bunch?Just some questions =)
Great article for Cost/Performance comparison.
Puddyglum1 - Friday, October 20, 2006 - link
Woah, there's a lot more there now. Thanks for the explanation.I just built a workstation for a client using the 965P-DS3, but the board was DOA. I went to a local shop and picked up a 965P-S3 instead (seeing as how the only main feature missing was the solid capacitors of the -DS3), and it performed just as well as the DS3. For $110, a GA-965P-S3 would be the best Cost/Performance of the 965P bunch, in my unresearched opinion.
JarredWalton - Friday, October 20, 2006 - link
Now you're skipping ahead to part 2! :p