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
Zak - Tuesday, November 14, 2006 - link
Yeah, WTF with the software design? Did they hire someone fired from FisherPrice or what? It's ugly and dysfunctional, even Asus AI Booster isn't THIS ugly.<Z>
mindless1 - Monday, November 13, 2006 - link
Regarding the article comment about the floppy connector,"We would just as well have this connector disappear at this time."
you might want to clarify who "we" is, since there are plenty of people who want a floppy connector even if they don't have a constant use for a floppy drive.
Remember that one person's use of a system does not equal entire world. Many legacy apps and even some emergency bios recovery routines require a floppy drive. If this were a reduced form factor board, it stands to reason that more features requiring connectors need to be left out, but to give up functionality on a whim is hardly useful, it's not as though you would have to grand replacement feature on that bottom edge, cubic inch of space otherwise.
Larso - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link
Oh my, do those motherboard monitoring/tuning applications look ugly... Ugly as in grotesque swollen blobs rather than functional design.A shame, I really liked the biostar board until the accompanying software utility appeared before for my eyes, aww... The gigabyte software is not pretty either... Can you switch the GUI to something less graphical and more standard windows widgets -like?
Do all software accompanying motherboards look like this??
Avalon - Saturday, November 11, 2006 - link
You mean you actually use software to overclock? Do it the manly way and use the BIOS.Larso - Saturday, November 11, 2006 - link
Its not about overclocking, the problem is if the motherboard software has some specific monitoring/adjusting features not available in freeware monitoring applications. Then you would have to use that monstrous software if you want the feature.Another problem is quality impression of the product as a whole. That software's user interface simply turns me off. Why don't they make the interface look like PRO tools, instead of plastic hell!
bullfrawg - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link
I think it's great that, as mentioned in the first article, you are checking out the manufacturer's tech support by pretending to be regular joes rather than review sites. So I want to express interest in seeing more detail about how tech support treats you. ASUS seems to have gotten a bad reputation lately for tech support -- is this justified in your experience? I see that you say Gigabyte has been good so far. Thanks!Staples - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link
The 965 performs very well no matter what board it is on. I will be waiting till you get a 650i Ultra board to review. I am holding out on a Core Duo and my next purchase will be between these two chipsets.Kensei - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link
Nice old school reference back to the double-mint twins. You definitely dated yourself with that one Gary.Kensei
Hikari - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link
Not really, I saw a double mint advertisement on TV with twins the other day...Kensei - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link
Really! I didn't know they had done a remake of that commercial.Ken