Intel Core Duo: AOpen i975Xa-YDG to the Rescue
by Gary Key on May 4, 2006 8:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
FSB Overclocking Results
| Front Side Bus Overclocking Testbed | |
| Processor: | Intel Core Duo T2400 -1.83GHz |
| CPU Voltage: | 1.400v (1.250V default) |
| Memory Settings: | 4-4-4-15 at 667MHz |
| Memory Voltage: | 2.15v |
| NB Voltage: | 1.575V |
| PCI-E Voltage: | 1.525V |
| Cooling: | AOpen Supplied Cooler |
| Power Supply: | FPS FX700-GLN |
| Maximum CPU OverClock: | 255fsb x 11 (2805MHz) +54% |
| Maximum FSB OverClock: | 255fsb x 11 (2805MHz) +54% |
 |
| Click to enlarge |
This board is a very good overclocker although it does have a couple of quirks. The BIOS allows you to overclock the front side bus by 1MHz increments but you are limited at both the minimum and maximum levels by a set of jumpers. If the JP4 and JP5 jumpers are enabled the board defaults to a 166MHz minimum and a 199MHz maximum. If these jumpers are disabled the board defaults to a 200MHz minimum and a 320MHz maximum.
The Core Duo processor does not allow a change to the CPU multiplier so keep this in mind when deciding what CPU to purchase. We were able to take our retail CPU to a setting of 11x262 before we hit a ceiling with either the board or the CPU utilizing the stock cooling. We are reporting our maximum numbers at 11x255, not because of the board or CPU not being stable at 11x262, but due to our comparative Opteron 175 only reaching this level and remaining stable. This board series has reached the 274FSB level based upon user experiences, so we either reached the limit of our CPU or possibly our board does not overclock quite as well as retail samples.
Considering the maximum official Core Duo CPU is currently running at 2.16 GHz, an overclock to 2.882 GHz (using the relatively inexpensive T2400 CPU) is nothing to complain about! We might even add that our retail CPU stayed in the 36c to 39c range under load at the overclocked settings with the AOpen supplied heatsink/fan. Additional testing with a watercooling unit brought our temperatures down to the 26c range under full load as we reached a 267FSB level (required 1.675V on the Nortbridge, 5-5-5-15 memory timings) before the board would not post.
Memory Stress Testing
Memory stress tests look at the ability of the AOpen i975xa-YDG to operate at the officially supported memory frequencies of 667MHz DDR2 at the best performing memory timings the Corsair CM2X1024-6400PRO revision 1.4 will support.
| AOpen i975Xa- YDG Stable DDR2-667 Timings - 2 DIMMs (2/4 slots populated - 1 Dual-Channel Bank) |
|
| Clock Speed: | 166MHz (667FSB) |
| Timing Mode: | 667MHz - Default |
| CAS Latency: | 3 |
| RAS to CAS Delay: | 3 |
| RAS Precharge: | 3 |
| RAS Cycle Time: | 8 |
| Voltage: | 1.9V |
The AOpen board was very stable with two (1GB) DDR2 modules in Dual-Channel mode at the settings of 3-3-3-8 at 1.9V. The board would set tRAS to 12 if the memory selection was left on auto. We did not notice any issues throughout our testing with a tRAS setting of 8 at the stock 11x166 setting. We will now install our Corsair modules into all four available memory slots, which results in more strenuous requirements on the memory subsystem than testing just two DDR2 modules.
| AOpen i975Xa- YDG Stable DDR2-667 Timings - 4 DIMMs (4/4 slots populated - 2 Dual-Channel Banks) |
|
| Clock Speed: | 166MHz (667FSB) |
| Timing Mode: | 667MHz - Default |
| CAS Latency: | 3 |
| RAS to CAS Delay: | 3 |
| RAS Precharge: | 3 |
| RAS Cycle Time: | 12 |
| Voltage: | 1.95V |
The AOpen was completely stable with four (1GB) DDR2 modules in Dual-Channel operation at the settings of 3-3-3-12. Note that tRAS had to be changed from 8 to 12 along with a slight memory increase to 1.95V. These are excellent results as the board performed superbly throughout our memory testing regimen that included eight to twenty four hour runs of MemTest86 and Prime95 along with numerous iterations of SuperPI set at 32M. This board along with the Intel 975X core logic is about as solid as it gets.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
81 Comments
View All Comments
JarredWalton - Thursday, May 4, 2006 - link
Why did someone mod this post down? I'm serious: if you put an H in brackets, the AT comments engine interprets that as "turn on white text". No insult was intended towards HardOCP; I'm merely pointing out that Frumious' post turned the text white, unintentionally. Thanks for the negative mod points.... :|Frumious1 - Thursday, May 4, 2006 - link
Anyone else getting white text? What's up with that?Test:
[/font]
[/link]
Did that help?
goinginstyle - Thursday, May 4, 2006 - link
At least the quote was a bit different this time but still not needed. I thought the article was great and actually one of the best ones I have read lately. It was nice to finally see two like platforms compared against each other with the same cpu speeds and components although AMD2 would have been good to see.You really should do more of these comparisons as the reviewing one motherboard against another in the same product family gets boring. You never see much of a variance in the scores so the only question is if it sucks or not. At least this way you review the board and compare it against something you might be thinking about buying if you are a Intel or AMD user. You honestly get to see what works best for you. It was nice to see additional real application benchmarks instead of the same old winstone that or 3dmark this.
I was disappointed in not seeing any Photoshop benchmarks or something that has to do with graphics, it would round out your audio and video benchmarks nicely. Anyway, keep up the good work and hopefully you can do this same type of article when Conroe gets here against the AMD products.
In the meantime props to Intel for finally showing some performance improvement without needing a nuclear powerplant for the CPU.
goinginstyle - Thursday, May 4, 2006 - link
Any numbers yet?goinginstyle - Thursday, May 4, 2006 - link
....and temperature readings???Gary Key - Thursday, May 4, 2006 - link
We pulled the charts, the AOpen board uses a thermal sensor instead of the on-chip diode so our numbers are off. Once we decide what number to utilize, these numbers will be posted. If you refer to our Yonah Preview article, the power consumption numbers are listed for the 945GM board. I posted a couple of numbers earlier in this thread with the AOpen board. Thanks....goinginstyle - Thursday, May 4, 2006 - link
Thank you for the update and hopefully we can see these numbers soon.BigLan - Thursday, May 4, 2006 - link
"The rear panel contains the standard PS/2 mouse and keyboard ports, parallel port, LAN port, and 4 USB ports."Looking at the picture, I don't see a parallel port there and it's not listed on the specs either. Did you mean a firewire port?
Also, how useful is the external sata connector? Does the board come with a cable to utilise the power connector?
Gary Key - Thursday, May 4, 2006 - link
Sorry about that, yes, it was suppose to be Firewire. I had it corrected on my final draft and missed it twice in the edits.AOpen ships an excellent cable that has the drive and power port plugs together. I found the external connector to be very useful during testing on the JMicron chipset. Since I really enjoy HTPC tinkering, it will be of great usefulness for attaching or swapping large PVR drives out without entering the system. The JMicron chipset performed very well in our testing and had no issues handling Seagate's new 750GB drive.
BigLan - Thursday, May 4, 2006 - link
Thanks for the reply. Any chance you need an independent review doing on that 750GB drive ;)