Intel X58 Motherboard Roundup - What does $300 Get You?
by Gary Key on December 5, 2008 3:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Initial Overclocking Results
We are working on a comprehensive overclocking guide for the i7/X58 platform to fully explain each BIOS setting as well as providing an easy to follow set of instructions to get the most out of this new platform. In the meantime, we are showing our initial overclocking results with air-cooling and the i920. To be blunt, overclocking the i920 on air to 4GHz is fairly simple: raise Bclk to 191, enable turbo and HT modes, set VCore to 1.4125V, VTT to 1.30V, VDimm to 1.67V, and set your 6GB kit to 9-9-9-24 as a good base start. After that, it is merely a matter of fine tuning the voltages a little and adjusting memory timings for improved performance and/or stability. Of course, all of this depends on the quality of your memory, cooling, and CPU. In our case, even with very good air-cooling, we found the practical limit for VCore to be around 1.425V without incurring throttling under load temperatures. Based on this setting, we arrived at our 21x191 setting. We will take a further look at overclocking on these boards and others with a CoolIT Systems Freezone Elite shortly.
Our overclocking numbers are reached with HT and Turbo settings enabled on a retail CPU. This adds a significant load on the IMC and memory system resulting in the need to run higher voltages than if we turned off HT or Turbo, especially HT. In fact, a 19x211 (ES CPU) setting without HT or Turbo enabled resulted in us lowering VCore from the 1.4125V range to 1.35V and VDimm from an average of 1.67V to 1.64V while retaining like CPU clock speeds and stability. Performance is basically equal, except in applications that take advantage of four or more cores where a slight lead goes to an HT enabled system. Our retail CPU sample is not the best around so our non HT/Turbo enabled voltages and Bclk numbers could be improved with a better unit. In fact, the retail CPU we utilized refused to go over a 205 Bclk so we had to use an ES sample for the 19x211 testing. We have additional CPUs arriving shortly.
All of our boards easily reached 21x191 for a turbo boosted speed of 4010MHz or so. Each board was able to run our Corsair or Mushkin 1600MHz 6GB kits at CAS7 with ASUS offering the best timings at 7-7-7-20 1T, Gigabyte at 7-8-7-24 1T, MSI at 7-8-7-20 1T, and EVGA at 7-8-7-20 1T. Memory performance was very close for each solution considering the Bclk ratio was not exactly at 191 as set in the BIOS. The EVGA board returned a 190.5 setting, MSI at 191.5, ASUS at 190.9, and Gigabyte at 191. Even accounting for the various Bclk speeds, the boards were extremely close in the write, copy, and latency numbers; the exact numbers we think are extremely important for improving system performance with an IMC design, whether from Intel or AMD.
Overall, we think the Gigabyte numbers are the best and for good reason. On each board, we set the basic timings based on extensive stability testing and let each individual board set the balance of the subtimings based on their auto settings. Gigabyte offers an additional memory setting that improves subtimings automatically; there are three different settings: Standard, Turbo,and Extreme. We utilized the Turbo setting without affecting stability. The Standard setting returned results that were slightly lower than the other boards and the Extreme setting was not stable.
This is not to take away from the performance of the other boards. In fact, each successive MSI BIOS has improved memory performance and stability greatly, to the point now that the Eclipse board is able to run with the wolves. ASUS started out with the fastest memory performance, and in our initial testing beyond 4GHz their ability to run tighter timings pays off as you increase Bclk rates. EVGA just provided a BIOS that opens up 24 different subtimings and we could improve memory performance about 3% after a quick session.
Of course, manually tuning each setting certainly results in better performance in certain benchmarks - you know, the ones like SuperPI 32M, AquaMark, or WinRAR. However, you will never notice the difference in daily usage unless you do it wrong and wonder why Excel or Crysis constantly crashes. So, for the majority of users we highly recommend auto settings for the subtimings - and often for the base memory timings as well.
The one knock we have against the Gigabyte board is that VDroop is present even with load line calibration enabled. We had to set our VCore to 1.4250 to 1.4300V to ensure stability after accounting for VDroop; however, the board proved to be stable at a real 1.392V ~ 1.412V. The EVGA board tended to overvolt slightly under load while the MSI and ASUS boards kept VCore stable.
Overclocking to 21x191 with our G.Skill or Patriot 1600MHz kits was like an Indiana Jones adventure. Just when we thought the treasure of stability was in our hands, it would slip away quickly and we had to go through some exciting travels to get it back. To be honest, the ASUS board was the easiest to clock high with 12GB installed. The Gigabyte and EVGA products required a few BIOS revisions before we could overclock properly and we are still fighting with the MSI board. All of the manufacturers stated that they fully support 12GB operation up to DDR3-1333, but after that, the IMC is being pushed beyond its official rating from Intel. However, like the official 1.65V VDimm warning, we basically ignored the official rating and set off to see how high we could go on air-cooling.
Let's get the bad news out of the way first. We could not get the MSI board stable past a 21x175 setting utilizing manual tuning methods. We tried every setting, especially setting tRFC to 74 or higher and starting with 10-10-10-24 timings, but nothing worked. If we set the board to auto settings for voltages and memory, manually set Bclk to 200, and turned on Turbo/HT the board would work; however, VCore was set to 1.48V, VTT to 1.48V, and VDimm to 1.90V. Not bad for a stable 4.1GHz, and considering the relationship between VTT and VDimm, we were within a safe range for not destroying our CPU. However, the VCore level was too much for our air-cooling solution on a 24/7 basis and after a few hours load temps would rise past 90C, throttling would occur, and our system would crash. What we found to be strange was that a 21x191 manual setting, but with all other settings the same as the 21x200 setup, would crash the system after the initial POST sequence. MSI is working on it and we expect a solution shortly.
We were able to run the ASUS board at memory timings of 8-8-8-20 2T compared to 9-8-8-24 1T on the Gigabyte and EVGA boards. Memory performance was nearly identical between each board and once again showed that we could make a choice if required between a lower CAS setting with 2T or a higher CAS setting with 1T enabled without really affecting performance in our application benchmarks. We had to set VCore to 1.425V, VTT to 1.325V, IOH to 1.20V, and VDimm to 1.70V for 24/7 stability on each board. Once again, the Gigabyte board operated fine even though VDroop meant real voltage swung between 1.392V and 1.412V. We could have slightly reduced our VCore settings to 1.4125V on the ASUS and EVGA board but we always had Crysis Warhead lock up on us after the 15th pass out of 25.
Overall, we generally found it was easier to overclock with the ASUS P6T-Deluxe and could easily do it on mostly auto settings. We would recommend this board for those who do not want to get their hands too dirty to reach a reasonable overclock level. The ASUS BIOS is very informative and lists out the min/max and standard settings for the major BIOS options, and a new user interested in overclocking will find this comforting. You can still get down and dirty with the P6T when it comes to tweaking the BIOS for best performance. Based on this we find the ASUS board to have a very balanced design for both types of users.
Except for the informative BIOS settings, the same basically holds true for the EVGA X58 SLI board, and in some ways we liked its simplicity of settings when overclocking. The latest BIOS allows you to tweak further but still not to the absolute degree of the ASUS or Gigabyte boards. Since the V15 BIOS, getting high Bclk with 12GB has been relatively easy and pain free. Also, the BIOS is smart about setting the right auto timings to get the best possible performance while retaining stability. This platform has also proved to be rock stable. Depending on your memory supplier, there might be a need to set tRFC to 74 or higher when clocking high with 12GB installed.
The MSI Eclipse X58 is an interesting board; it has all the makings of a great overclocking platform and yet the BIOS is still a tweak or two away from being really good. The board performed equally to the other offerings with a 3GB or 6GB memory load but buckled underneath the pressure when loaded with 12GB. Based on the progress MSI has made in the past couple of weeks, we expect this problem to be solved shortly. The one item of note when overclocking this board is that a few of the voltage settings in the BIOS are rather cryptic as MSI utilizes a +/- setting for changes. The base voltage information is not always listed so the user has to have prior knowledge of base settings before making an informed decision.
The Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5 is a tweaker's delight, and based on our initial testing with the latest F4K series BIOS we have no doubt now about the potential capabilities it offers. Gigabyte has come a long a way in improving the overclocking capabilities of this board along with improved performance and stability in a short time. If Gigabyte could match usability features of the ASUS BIOS and improve auto settings, we feel like this board could ultimately offer the best overclocking experience in the mid-range X58 market.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
78 Comments
View All Comments
Elvis2 - Sunday, December 7, 2008 - link
i'm tired of being a free beta tester for these "top" tier manufacturers (remembering my E7205 days). If I'm going to spend $300.+ on a motherboard, I expect it to work AS ADVERTISED. I used to upgrade every year but for the past couple, I've been hesitant to do so. I don't want to fork over my hard earned cash (particularly in this economy)for a new rig only to spend hours on the phone with some tech support guy that dosen't know half of what I do ( let's start on page ten ok?)and wait weeks for a bios that corrects the problem. My Opty rig has been incredibly stable while producing a 50% o/c (thanks eVGA)but is getting long in the tooth. I run SLI and have been waiting on an Intel chipset that supports it. I'm going back to intel and the i7 920...maybe. I'm going to wait a couple of months tho. Bleeding edge, spending that kind of coin, and the hassle of working out the bugs, after fifteen years it's not worth it to me.Sorry for the rant. Jmh $.02.
btw, great article.
fausto412 - Sunday, December 7, 2008 - link
There isn't one board manufacturer thatdoesn't have a bunch of people complaining in the forums all over the internet. Anand's opening explains why.I hate upgrading bios expecting better stability or performance and getting more problems or no fixes.
Gary, i think it is time to have some kinda of database that covers all boards and their known issues going back 2 years or to the 3 series boards. if the flag ship board has a problem then by extension lower end boards have that problem. if they didn't care to make their product the best then that is their problem. GIVE THEM BAD REVIEWS so that they get on the ball.
I never knew Anandtech went back and forward with the board makers as if you're beta testers.
We need to do something to make things better
strikeback03 - Monday, December 8, 2008 - link
I'd argue that it is entirely possible for the flagship product to have problems that lower-end products do not. Expensive X58 is the only option for now for i7 processors, but look back at LGA775. I wouldn't be at all surprised if some stability compromises were made on X38/X48 boards in pursuit of higher SuperPI numbers, while those same compromises are probably not present in the mainstream P35/P45 boards of the same age. Motherboards are one area where I can see going with a mid-level (~$90-130 for LGA775) product might give a better result for the majority of users than jumping to the high end would.borneoo - Sunday, December 7, 2008 - link
Beside the GHz, and MB/s would be good to have a chart/list, which shows the problems of the parts, and aggregated charts to show problems belongs to the same company, ... or SEARCHABLE DATABASE about errors related to products / companies and solutionsJonnyDough - Sunday, December 7, 2008 - link
"Our plan is to cycle through each manufacturer so we are not singling out any one supplier but we are going to be brutally honest in our assessments in these particular focus reviews." (the quote button never works for me in Firefox. Plz fix)Awesome. At least someone is. I think a "two strikes before we post" policy is fair.
DandAG - Sunday, December 7, 2008 - link
After reading the first page of this article “Intel X58 Motherboard Roundup - What does $300 Get You?”, I started reading all the blogs. At first I agreed 100% with Anand’s comments, and wanted to jump on the band wagon like everyone else, but then I read some of the response. Realistically, review sites can’t use the boards under test with ALL the different software/hardware configurations consumers will, and they cannot postpone a review until all the BIOS and operating bugs are fixed…they would be releasing a review a year (or more) after the next generation hardware has already hit the market. People don’t visit these review sites to see how good a DDR2 system is compared to a DDR system, they come to these sites to read about the future, to get the “inside scoop” as to what the manufacturers are thinking up next, and to see the new features of hardware out there today because they are thinking of upgrading right now. To read about overclocking and performance comparisons is really just a bonus for the overwhelming majority. Most people just jump to the conclusion page to see if the reviewer recommends the product or not. We’ve all done it.Review sites need the merchandise to review and the funds to stay afloat, so upsetting certain manufacturers is not in their best interest. They can get away with critiques, questions, “less than expected” reviews, and some (very little) criticisms, but if they were to only give bad reviews every time, manufacturers would stop sending them products to review. And if you think that is a good thing, “they’ll just purchase the final release like the rest of us and provide a balanced review”, think again. If a review site did that, 1) it would have to advertise like crazy to maintain its purchasing ability, 2) not be able to provide future analysis, 3) and not provide the consumer anything more than what “free” chat rooms/manufacturer message boards give you.
I agree there needs to be an industry-wide change; a change in R&D, change in QC, and a change in review process and reporting, BUT the real change has to come from the consumer. We the purchasers of their merchandise have to take a stand, bite the antiquated hardware bullet, and wait to buy until all the bugs are fixed (at least to a reasonable state). As long as we continue to want to be “the first” or “the fastest”, manufacturers will continue to scramble to be first on the market with crap that can or cannot be fixed later on.
Don’t jump down the throats of review sites like AnandTech; instead tell them what YOU want to read about. Give these sites constructive criticism, and suggestions to better themselves like Christoph, Gary, Anand, and all the other reviewers here give the manufacturers. The old “if you don’t have anything better to say, then don’t say anything at all” thing.
Personally, I would love to have AnandTech continue to review the next best thing before it hits the market just to see what the manufacturers are planning and whether or not the reviewer thinks upgrading will be worth it, BUT I also want them to then purchase that same item over-the-counter for a “final look” review, and then tell it like it is. Of course that can’t be done with all items initially reviewed (too time consuming), but the items that bloggers have shown the most interest in.
Steve Z - Sunday, December 7, 2008 - link
First, kudos for reqiring reliability. I've now bought the ASUS board. I won't overclock because I know what gate stress does to CMOS electronics (I slowly destroyed a chip I was testing at an elevated voltage. 18 hours is not enough time to run a $300 CPU). I use my computer to get work done and view overclockability as an indication of robustness in the board's engineering. If it's not - I need to know this. Thank you Gary and Anand - beleive me, $100 extra is a small price to pay for a motherboard that will not waste days of my time trying to get it to work.Second, a notice to those of you who are going to buy the ASUS board. They put the "Crash Free BIOS utility" and the driver installation utility on the same CD. Since installing all the drivers takes 3 restarts, imagine my surprise when installing the ethernet drivers did several surprise BIOS flashes (I didn't even know what was happening at first and I reset the system a few times during the process. To ASUS's credit, the board recovered).
If I pay $300+ dollars for a board, I expect them to pay the extra 5 cents and include a second CD. When you go through your three restarts, make sure you remove the disk every time then put it back in once the OS starts up. Shame on you ASUS for the oversight.
That said, everything is working well now. I hope I didn't buy a product from the company who thought it was only OK for 3 GB to run reliably as I'm running 6 GB now and will go up at some time in the future since I run math sims.
cheers,
--Steve Z.
RagingDragon - Sunday, December 7, 2008 - link
Reading the sections on each board, I think the ASUS was the only board which fully worked, out of the box, with 12GB of RAM. This strongly implies they were *not* the 3GB company.It's hinted the Gigabyte had some undescribed issues with 12GB and older BIOS's, and it's stated that the EVGA also had undescribed issues with 12GB (no indication whether those issues were at stock speeds or when overclocking). The MSI still has issues overclocking 12GB or RAM - nothing said about whether it worked at stock speed out of the box.
LeeKay - Saturday, December 6, 2008 - link
I bought the GA-EX58-Extreme as I posted in the forums the quality of the board is the best I have seen but support wise and bios wise this board sucks worse than any board I have had. For a motherboard to have issues when I use 12GB is beyond me. I want to use this pc for everything from online banking thru gaming for the wife my son and me and to do video editing. Right now I can just run Need for speed undercover at any resonable clock speed without it crashing. Thats as of F4j. And I still can not let my board go to sleep with S3 enabled nor can I expect my Data drives running on the hardware raid controller to recover in S3 mode nore can I run my pc with any of the energy saving options in the bios. Oh and I cannot run my memory at 12gb and at 1600Mhz just noway in hell it will be stable. I have to run it at 1333mhz. I cant run SLI and have my X-FI PCI sound card in either PCI slot and have the pc boot into windows. It just blue screens with the latest Bios. (I am running 2 280GTX with single slot active cooling).The good note is to run at 4.13ghz I am running 1.425v without loadline correction. its stable and with the above taken into account far better tha the past issues.
Sunsmasher - Saturday, December 6, 2008 - link
Your comments are extremely well thought out and relevant.The idea that $300(!) motherboards don't work reliably upon release
is beyond ridiculous.
I think your plan to write an as-is review initially in a great idea.
This will give early buyers a true heads-up on what they're getting.
And then later, you can perform your invaluable beta feedback service to the manufacturers and your readers.
Hopefully, this policy will cause improvements on the QC end.
Thanks again for being so on top of it!