Intel P965: The Double Mint Twins Gone Wild
by Gary Key on November 9, 2006 8:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Synthetic Graphics Performance
The 3DMark series of benchmarks developed and provided by Futuremark are among the most widely used tools for benchmark reporting and comparisons. Although the benchmarks are very useful for providing apple to apple comparisons across a broad array of GPU and CPU configurations they are not a substitute for actual application and gaming benchmarks. In this sense we consider the 3DMark benchmarks to be purely synthetic in nature but still valuable for providing consistent measurements of performance.
In our first tests, each P965 platform score is so close that there is no real winner or loser. In the more memory and CPU sensitive 3DMark03 benchmark we see the same trend with the P965 boards scoring extremely close and our Biostar 965PT placing second. The Biostar 965PT scores first in the 3DMark06 test and once again is doing better than the P965 Deluxe board. We attribute this to a combination of newer BIOS and the variability in MCH chipsets. We expected the S3 to perform on par with the DS3 but it stays right behind the DS3 in these tests. We will see this pattern repeat itself several times.
General System Performance
The PCMark05 benchmark developed and provided by Futuremark was designed for determining overall system performance for the typical home computing user. This tool provides both system and component level benchmarking results utilizing subsets of real world applications or programs. This benchmark is useful for providing comparative results across a broad array of Graphics subsystems, CPU, Hard Disk, and Memory configurations along with multithreading results. In this sense we consider the PCMark benchmark to be both synthetic and real world in nature while providing consistency in our benchmark results.
Considering our 3DMark results we really did not expect a difference in this benchmark but there is one. The Intel P965 based ASUS boards had scored significantly better than our other P965 boards in previous testing due to the final test which consists of multitasking three different applications. The ASUS P965 boards scored up to 58% better in the File Encryption and HDD Virus section of the test. The File Compression number was around 16% better on the ASUS P965 boards.
After testing the Gigabyte S3 board and noticing it scoring nearly the same as the DS3 board we expected the same with our Biostar twins. We were surprised when the Biostar 965PT had the same basic scores as the ASUS P965 boards. We played detective once again and flashed the Biostar P965PT board with the P965 Deluxe BIOS. The P965PT results were the same as the original P965 Deluxe scores indicating the newer BIOS design does indeed have the benefit of additional tuning.
The 3DMark series of benchmarks developed and provided by Futuremark are among the most widely used tools for benchmark reporting and comparisons. Although the benchmarks are very useful for providing apple to apple comparisons across a broad array of GPU and CPU configurations they are not a substitute for actual application and gaming benchmarks. In this sense we consider the 3DMark benchmarks to be purely synthetic in nature but still valuable for providing consistent measurements of performance.
In our first tests, each P965 platform score is so close that there is no real winner or loser. In the more memory and CPU sensitive 3DMark03 benchmark we see the same trend with the P965 boards scoring extremely close and our Biostar 965PT placing second. The Biostar 965PT scores first in the 3DMark06 test and once again is doing better than the P965 Deluxe board. We attribute this to a combination of newer BIOS and the variability in MCH chipsets. We expected the S3 to perform on par with the DS3 but it stays right behind the DS3 in these tests. We will see this pattern repeat itself several times.
General System Performance
The PCMark05 benchmark developed and provided by Futuremark was designed for determining overall system performance for the typical home computing user. This tool provides both system and component level benchmarking results utilizing subsets of real world applications or programs. This benchmark is useful for providing comparative results across a broad array of Graphics subsystems, CPU, Hard Disk, and Memory configurations along with multithreading results. In this sense we consider the PCMark benchmark to be both synthetic and real world in nature while providing consistency in our benchmark results.
Considering our 3DMark results we really did not expect a difference in this benchmark but there is one. The Intel P965 based ASUS boards had scored significantly better than our other P965 boards in previous testing due to the final test which consists of multitasking three different applications. The ASUS P965 boards scored up to 58% better in the File Encryption and HDD Virus section of the test. The File Compression number was around 16% better on the ASUS P965 boards.
After testing the Gigabyte S3 board and noticing it scoring nearly the same as the DS3 board we expected the same with our Biostar twins. We were surprised when the Biostar 965PT had the same basic scores as the ASUS P965 boards. We played detective once again and flashed the Biostar P965PT board with the P965 Deluxe BIOS. The P965PT results were the same as the original P965 Deluxe scores indicating the newer BIOS design does indeed have the benefit of additional tuning.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
23 Comments
View All Comments
Marlin1975 - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link
The biggest problem I, and seems like most, have with 965 chipsets is the JMicron JMB363 IDE. You said there is a driver problem for the newwest driver but did not say what driver that is? Like 13.03, 15, etc... I think I have a new driver then someone in the forums has one that is 2 whole numbers newwer.I have a hard time trying to find a decent driver so I just get what I can for the JMicron JMB363. My DVD burner just comes up in windows as a reg. drive and I can;t get windows to see that it is a burner. Mind you Nero sees it as a burner. So I am guessing that is a JMicron JMB363.
I like my Gigabyte board, better then the Asus I had. But the lack of IDE support by Intel makes me want to get a Nvidia 600i board even more.
jackylman - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link
The Biostar 965PT (and, I assume, the Deluxe) includes a VIA VT6401 IDE controller instead of the Jmicron. I had no problems seeing the controller in the BIOS or getting my optical drive to run in DMA.Just another reason that this board rules.
Viditor - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link
The biggest problem I have encountered seems like a small one, but it's getting annoying.It seems that none of the 965 boards allow for 2 x PATA connectors...I don't know for sure, but I assume this is a limitation of the chipset.
The problem I keep running into is the reuse of existing components for an upgrade. Obviously you need one of the PATAs for the optical drives, which means that unless you get a PATA controller card you can't reuse your existing PATA drives...
Sho - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link
The P965 chipset doesn't have any PATA support by itself, so the mobo makers need to include a seperate controller.BladeVenom - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link
Nice to see the less expensive models getting a thorough review. Everyone reviews the Biostar Deluxe, even though it's almost impossible to find, unless you're a reviewer.Also nice to see that model of Crucial RAM used. Next time you do a budget review could you also test the cheapest memory available, and 1:1 ratio for overclocking be damned.
Gary Key - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link
We are still testing lower priced memory. I will add some addtional overclocking results to these two boards tomorrow. :)
BladeVenom - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link
Thanks.DaveLessnau - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link
I might have missed the reason for this in the write-ups. If so, I apologize. But, why aren't you reviewing any Intel boards? I'd have thought that they'd provide a decent baseline for comparison to see if the other manufacturers can do any better/different.Gary Key - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link
The Intel board we originally received has been pulled from retail availability. We have a BLKDP965LTCK coming next week to take its place. I believe this board currently retails for $110~$115. I will do my best to at least get performance numbers from this board in our charts before the final article goes up.Sho - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link
... where's that high-end board roundup hiding? IIRC an Anandtech staffer had announced it for last Friday in a comment to another article about two weeks back.