ASUS ROG Rampage Formula: Why we were wrong about the Intel X48
by Kris Boughton on January 25, 2008 4:30 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Conclusions and Final Thoughts
Our experience with the ASUS Rampage Formula has been tremendously enlightening thus far. Although we can confidently claim a long-standing familiarity with MCH Read Delay (tRD) and its affect on overall system performance, this motherboard provided us exactly the foundation we needed to develop our current understanding of just how some of these previously elusive settings really work. There is no reason why any enthusiast should not be able to arm themselves with this information in their quest for the perfect overclock based on overall system performance. We sincerely hope that the Rampage Formula is the first of many boards from ASUS to incorporate this kind of great innovation. We have grown accustomed to using it now, and we don't want to go back to the old methods of manipulating tRD.
The Rampage Formula's layout is as close to perfect to possible - water-cooling enthusiasts will have no problems fitting two ATI graphics cards in Crossfire, even when installing full-coverage water blocks. Through-hole mounting for the Northbridge and the ability to remove the stock cooling solution without disturbing the portion covering the MOSFETs in the power delivery circuit is especially nice. Fitting an after-market heatsink on the MCH will be simple and straightforward. Then again, this may not be necessary; we actually found the X48 to be cooler than the X38 in the production level boards.
The ability to use DDR2 is another great benefit to consider when selecting an X48 board. Again, ASUS has made the right choice in this arena and has decided to provide separate solutions based on each memory type. For the ultimate in performance, though, we suggest you check out DDR3 based configurations if you can afford it.
We anxiously await the impending availability of this board; we know that its release - and that of its DDR3-based "Extreme" brethren - has the potential to usher in a new round of 3D performance records from today's top overclockers. The early maturity of ASUS' BIOS coupled with the capabilities of the Intel X48 chipset make a fantastic combination for achieving absolute top speeds. For those of us more firmly grounded in reality, rest assured that we have a hard time finding reason not to recommend the use of this board in even the most demanding new systems.
It would be ignorant of us not to expect other companies such as MSI, abit, DFI, and Foxconn to follow suit with the introduction of their top-end X48 boards. In fact, just last week we took an in-depth look at the Gigabyte GA-X48T-DQ6 and what it had to offer. Although it's not quite as strong out of the gate, given time we expect BIOS improvements to close the gap. The Gigabyte board also uses newer DDR3 technology, so whether or not ASUS' comparable board will experience the same types of problems remains to be seen.
One thing is for certain, Intel and ASUS have teamed up to bring us another great overclocking choice that sets a new standard in the market. Early reports of limited performance improvements may have tempted you sit out the X48 release. Based on our results from the ASUS Rampage Formula, we will go on record now and reject our previous position. We will be running X48 boards in our personal systems; what about you?
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
73 Comments
View All Comments
Vikendios - Thursday, January 31, 2008 - link
Very Interesting. But I believe that AT is also guilty of perpetuating the chipset/multiple GPU incompatibility (or non-optimization) myths, by not giving us systematic reviews of X38/48 and 680/790i using both ATI and Nvidia twinned cards.And if some BIOS adjustments or driver updates are becessary to twin Nvidia cards under Intel chipsets, or ATI/AMD cards under Nvidia's, kindly tell and guide us.
I'm not a conspiration theorist, but I think there is more than meets the eye in the present situation.
The apparent paradox of Intel (chipsets) pushing AMD (Crossfire) solutions is just marketing cycle hysteresis from the days when ATI was still an independent canadian company.
But both Intel and AMD resent video card chip manufacturers forcing their way into hard-wired motherboard real estate thru the multiple GPU concept, with attendant slot and chipset modifications. With the demise of Via, Intel and AMD believe they can own the chipsets, as long as the motherboard manufacturers are only assemblers.
For Nvidia, multiple GPU is an easy way to extend the life of a good graphic chip until the next generation comes up, but mostly it provides for a temporary proprietary claim on the motherboard design. 3dfx first tried that years ago in Voodoo days and it worked. It worked again when ATI couldn't follow up fast enough on SLI and had to fall in AMD's arms.
Nvidia gambled that SLI would allow it to impose its own chipset business, either by technical or marketing (SLI endorsment) means. What next ? Special gaming CPU's ? That's a dangerous taunt, although Intel doesn't yet dare buy them, or compete directly with them with their own GPU's, out of anti-trust concerns in Brussels.
Holly - Wednesday, January 30, 2008 - link
Excelent description of memory timing magic. Thumbs up :-)FSBastrd - Tuesday, January 29, 2008 - link
I may have come off a little brash with my first comment. The article is pretty sweet, and I was able to read through it without the pictures, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't like to view them. It's not just this article either. Pictures pretty much never load on this website for me.kjboughton - Wednesday, January 30, 2008 - link
Do you run some type of ad blocker? It may be causing problems by incorrectly blocking images from our servers...FSBastrd - Wednesday, January 30, 2008 - link
I'm basically running a stock version of Firefox, so no. Ironically, the ads are just about the only pictures that do load for me. Also, all of the picture for the AnandTech homepage load for me, it's just the pics in the articles This is the only website that really gives me problems. One last thing, some (rare) pictures do load for me from the articles. All in all, it's quite strange, and I can't figure it out.FSBastrd - Tuesday, January 29, 2008 - link
Am I the only one who can't get pictures to load from this site. It would sure make this article a whole lot easier to follow along.sje123 - Tuesday, January 29, 2008 - link
Excellent review as ever!Quick question with regard to Watercooling blocks for this board. It looks more or less identical to the X38 apart from the different chip in the NB, therefore I'm wondering if you could tell me whether or not you think an ASUS X38 NB block would also fit the ASUS X48 Rampage?
is the NB under the cooler the same size etc and are the mouting screws in the same position as the X38 eg the Maximus?
THe SB and the mofset coolers will be the same as the Maximus.
snarfbot - Sunday, January 27, 2008 - link
alright, pretty exciting results here.at trd of 8 (default) at 400mhz 1:1 cas 4, i got 7687mb/s read, and 64ns latency in everest.
at trd of 6 at the same speed, divider and cas setting i got 8089mb/s read, and 59.8ns latency.
then just for fun i bumped the speed upto 500 and loosened the timings to cas 5, at 5:4, i left the trd at 6. at these settings i got 8640mb/s read, and 57.5 latency.
the latency suprised me, as the trd remained the same, and i actually loosened the cas latency.
anyways pretty good results.
processor is a e2140@3200mhz.
snarfbot - Sunday, January 27, 2008 - link
alright, i have a ga-p35-ds3l. im running the fsb at 400, memory at 1:1 cas 4.i set trd to 6 in the bios. based on the formula, it shouldnt even post.
trd(6) - tcl(4)/n(1) =fsb400(2)/1
2=2
im gonna run through sandra and see what the difference is, if there is any, or perhaps this setting doesnt work correctly on this board.
Fyl - Sunday, January 27, 2008 - link
not to lower the merits of this great article but since I've read it I've been experimenting on my machine different settings and for some of them your formula doesn't seem to stand; here's an example of a stable configuration, no overvoltage to anything:E8500@3.6 (400MHzx9)
P35-DS4 (tRD 7)
2x2G DDR2 800 (400MHz, 5-5-5-12)
based on your formula N = 400:400 = 1 and x = 2
therefore 7-(5/1) > 2/1 => 2 > 2 => false but actually working
am I missing anything?