First Impressions

In our first look at the 650i chipset we asked the $64,000 question: did NVIDIA succeed in designing a competitive chipset when compared to the Intel P965? Our answer to that question was a very reserved yes, the reason being that we did not know if the chipset or ASUS' implementation of it indicated the actual strength of the 650i. We had some hunches and believed the chipset was indeed competitive, but it certainly was not going to deliver a knockout blow to the P965. After working with the P6N SLI Platinum board for a couple of weeks and seeing MSI's dedication to improving performance and resolving issues with the 650i chipset we feel that $64,000 question can be answered now. Before we do, let's go over this board once again.

The performance of the board is excellent, and in some ways beyond excellent. The stock performance is impressive across a wide array of applications and games but considering the time it took to get to market we did expect slightly better overclocking performance and a fully polished BIOS. MSI is close and we fully expect them to improve upon the overclocking while addressing a few other niggling issues but we have to wonder at what price? Typically, you have to sacrifice overclocking for superb stock or near stock performance or you have to sacrifice a few performance points at the base level in order to ensure the board will properly reach its limits at the top. MSI recently has offered excellent stock performance and stability while trading off the overclocking capability at the mid to upper end of the chipset's capability. How they will ultimately balance the capabilities of this board will be interesting but for now they are leaning to excellent stock performance while offering a decent level of overclocking. This is not necessarily a bad balance in our estimation but ultimately the market will decide which option is best.

Finding a balance in this performance oriented market is always difficult. One group wants superb overclocking and multitudes of BIOS options at the expense of stock performance as they will tune in the performance based upon their needs. Another group will want excellent stock results with the ability to overclock to a level that allows them to extend the life of their components or to at least experience a level of performance near those spending hundreds of dollars more for a system. Of course, you also have the group that wants both and at times we hover in all three camps, but usually we want to have our cake and eat it too.

In the end, we feel like the positioning of this board as a Platinum design with an emphasis on performance and features means the target audience for this board will probably want to give up a little stock performance in exchange for slightly better overclocking. This board has at least reached the 450FSB level but we would like to see a little more headroom and have it balance out around the 485~500FSB range. We already know the board can do 515+ FSB with an E6300 and a special performance BIOS so the design is capable of it; finding that right balance is now in MSI's hands.


Back to that $64,000 question, we feel like in the majority of areas that the NVIDIA 650i chipset can compete directly with the Intel P965. This chipset will struggle against the P965 in pure overclocking capability, power consumption, memory performance, CPU crunching activities, and of course general availability. We found the 650i SLI offered similar if not better performance in most cases and excelled in gaming where its main purpose in life exists. The advantages the 650i SLI offers is official SLI support, native IDE chipset capability along with support for four IDE devices, very flexible memory and FSB settings, and a similar price to performance ratio when compared to the P965.

With all that said, based upon the performance results and feature set of the P6N SLI Platinum board it leaves us wondering why we would spend over $70 more for the 680i boards. Sure, the 680i boards have additional features such as dual Gigabit Ethernet connections with DualNet technology, dual x16 graphics slots along with a slot designed for physics capability, an additional two SATA 3Gb/s and USB 2.0 ports, and enhancements like LinkBoost, SLI Ready Memory, and extended overclocking and memory capabilities. However, does every user need these additional features or will they even use them?

For the vast majority of users we think not, and believe the 650i SLI chipset offers basically the same performance as the 680i about 98% of the time for significantly less money. It may turn out that this chipset doesn't deliver a knockout blow to the P965 but instead to the 680i in most cases. In the end, none of this much matters unless the motherboard based upon a 650i chipset lives up to its expectations.

We believe that the MSI P6N SLI Platinum lives up to and at times exceeds our expectations of an Intel based motherboard in this price category. We also think this motherboard restores faith in the MSI Platinum brand name that seeks to offer the best balance of price and performance for the user. MSI still has some balancing to do with this board and if they do it right, then it will deserve a lot more than just our recommendation. For anyone short of the extreme overclockers and tweakers, the board already offers everything you could want.

Disk Controller, Power, and FSB OC
Comments Locked

20 Comments

View All Comments

  • ranutso - Wednesday, March 21, 2007 - link

    Great article. Thank you Gary.
  • cosmotic - Wednesday, March 14, 2007 - link

    How can you say that MSI software is decent? It's totally hideous. I think Anandtech owes it to the community to encourage motherboard manufactures to start writing native-feeling Windows applications instead of these crap piles all the manufactueres are shipping now. This includes AMD/ATI, nVidia, Realtek, and many others for their drivers as well.
  • Gorgonzola - Thursday, June 21, 2007 - link

    I could not agree more!
  • anandtech02148 - Wednesday, March 14, 2007 - link

    Here I go again
    complaining about the psu and power consumption, but 300watts load,200watts idle,
    not to mention fancy subwoofer, a few electronics here there,
    good gaming is in the summer time, and i'll be cranking up the AC too which is another 250wtts.
    i wish newegg.com would sell me a n.korean light water nuclear reactor so i can run all my greatest hardwares.




  • Spanki - Wednesday, March 14, 2007 - link

    Hey Gary,

    Since it looks like this mb outperforms pretty much every other board in the review in most tests (at stock speeds, where head-to-head comparisons usually take place) - including the much touted 'Extreme' board(s), do you plan to include it for comparisons in future reviews?
  • Olaf van der Spek - Tuesday, March 13, 2007 - link

    The 650i uses 21% more power on idle compared to the ICFX3200. What is nV doing with all that power? This seems absurd.
  • Gary Key - Tuesday, March 13, 2007 - link

    quote:

    The 650i uses 21% more power on idle compared to the ICFX3200. What is nV doing with all that power? This seems absurd.


    It is being channeled into the on-board Flux Capacitor. ;-) I can tell you that we have hounded NVIDIA to no end about this issue with their chipsets. It should be addressed when they finally go to a single chip solution later this year (we are still hoping this occurs).
  • Frumious1 - Tuesday, March 13, 2007 - link

    If I were to venture a guess, NVIDIA probably isn't doing any proper power savings work for the chipset. Just like with CPUs and GPUs, there's a lot of stuff on the chipset that is often not in use and can be put into a sleep/deep sleep mode. The 650i and 680i use 100-107W more power at full load than at idle. The 975X uses 141W more at load, P965 139W more, and RD600 105W more.

    IIRC, AMD is using a newer process technology for RD600, so that would help explain their lower overall power. Intel seems to benefit from power savings in idle mode, but at full load they are pretty close to NVIDIA. The extra "stuff" in 680i relative to 650i could easily account for the added ~10W that it requires. Seems to me like all companies involved could do more with chipset power savings. AMD is just ahead on the process tech (again, I think); Intel uses an older process but decent power saving circuitry; NVIDIA doesn't do anything to conserve chipset power.

    When you consider that at idle the PC is doing nothing important, AMD and Intel should drop CPU clocks further (600 MHz ought to be enough), and they could drop FSB/bus speeds and chipset voltages as well. Why run 1066FSB when you're doing essentially nothing? Why run 1000MHz HyperTransport to transfer... nothing? I believe AMD does drop HT speeds at idle on their mobles chips, so why not on desktop offerings?

    Just my two cents.
  • WT - Tuesday, March 13, 2007 - link

    Patiently awaiting the Gigabyte version of this board, as I was most interested in upgrading to the 965DS3 board rev 3.3, but the 650 look like it is worth the wait. Also, since the C2D price drop isn't until late April, I have time to wait and make a decision once that board is available. Good read as usual guys !
  • ghitz - Tuesday, March 20, 2007 - link

    Exactly what I was thinking !!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now