Intel P965: Mid-Range Performance Sector Roundup
by Gary Key on October 20, 2006 9:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Gaming Performance- FPS
As usual, gaming performance was tested with a variety of current games. We ran benchmarks with our standard 1280x1024 resolution. Given the number of users that run 19 inch LCDs these days, 1280x1024 represents one of the most commonly used resolutions. We will show 1600x1200 4xAA/8xAF and 1920x1200 4xAA/8XAF results in part three of our roundup when we test the motherboards that are capable of running CrossFire.
Battlefield 2
This benchmark is performed using DICE's built-in demo playback functionality with additional capture capabilities designed in house. During the benchmark, the camera switches between players and vehicles in order to capture the most action possible. There is a significant amount of smoke, explosions, and vehicle usage as this a very GPU intensive Battlefield 2 benchmark. We run Battlefield 2 using the highest quality graphics settings available in the video settings. The game itself is best experienced with average in-game frame rates of 35 and up.
F.E.A.R.
F.E.A.R. uses a built-in performance test that generates graphical test scenes based upon the actual game engine. This test consists of a couple of different action sequences, a stressful water flyby, and heavy use of shadows while traveling through hallways. F.E.A.R. is a very graphics intensive game and we switch all settings to maximum. An average frame rate for F.E.A.R. that can dip into the teens is not good for a first person shooter, but the game is still playable to around 25 fps, although we prefer 35fps.
Half-Life 2: Lost Coast
We use the built-in timedemo feature to benchmark the game. Our timedemo consists of starting at the bottom of the hill near the lake and ending in the old church. The Source engine timedemo feature is similar to the nettimedemo of Id's Doom 3 engine, in that it plays back more than just the graphics. The highest visual quality settings possible were used with HDR turned on. While the Source engine is notorious for giving great frame rates for almost any hardware setup, we find the game isn't as enjoyable if it isn't running at 35fps or above.
Quake 4
There has always been a lot of debate in the community surrounding pure timedemo benchmarking. We have opted to stick with the nettimedemo test rather than the timedemo option for motherboard benchmarking of Quake 4. To be clear, this means our test results focus mostly on the performance one would experience during actual game play. Additionally, Quake 4 limits frame rate to 60 fps during gameplay whether or not VSync is enabled. Our benchmark utilizes the IdNetDemo. This demo includes mainly outdoor areas with numerous players trying to wipe each other out. We tested the game with High Quality settings (uncompressed normal maps), and we enabled all the advanced graphics options except for VSync.
Serious Sam II
This benchmark is performed using Croteam's built-in demo capability in the Serious Sam II engine. We utilize the included Branchester Demo and capture the playback results using the Ctrl-~ function. The benchmark features a large number of combatants, explosions, and general mayhem. The benchmark is primarily GPU sensitive with the actual percentage of GPU/CPU/Audio activity being displayed during the benchmark run. We typically find this game is very playable at average in-game rates of 60 and above. We maximize all settings except antialiasing and anisotropic filtering within the general and advanced video settings.
FPS Gaming Summary
Our test results basically speak for themselves. If you utilize the same chipset you can expect the same results during benchmark testing. The differences between each board are minor and during actual game play we could not tell any differences amongst the motherboards tested today. We did not experience any issues during testing or during game play with each board. We generally play games for a couple of hours with each board to ensure there are no issues such as overheating, stuttering, or network issues when playing on-line. The one result that did catch our eye is that the performance of the Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3 was very consistent throughout testing as the board scored near or at the top in every game. We attribute this to Gigabyte programming in slightly tighter memory and MCH timings than the other manufacturers. Of course this is affecting their overclocking capability at this time.
As usual, gaming performance was tested with a variety of current games. We ran benchmarks with our standard 1280x1024 resolution. Given the number of users that run 19 inch LCDs these days, 1280x1024 represents one of the most commonly used resolutions. We will show 1600x1200 4xAA/8xAF and 1920x1200 4xAA/8XAF results in part three of our roundup when we test the motherboards that are capable of running CrossFire.
Battlefield 2
This benchmark is performed using DICE's built-in demo playback functionality with additional capture capabilities designed in house. During the benchmark, the camera switches between players and vehicles in order to capture the most action possible. There is a significant amount of smoke, explosions, and vehicle usage as this a very GPU intensive Battlefield 2 benchmark. We run Battlefield 2 using the highest quality graphics settings available in the video settings. The game itself is best experienced with average in-game frame rates of 35 and up.
F.E.A.R.
F.E.A.R. uses a built-in performance test that generates graphical test scenes based upon the actual game engine. This test consists of a couple of different action sequences, a stressful water flyby, and heavy use of shadows while traveling through hallways. F.E.A.R. is a very graphics intensive game and we switch all settings to maximum. An average frame rate for F.E.A.R. that can dip into the teens is not good for a first person shooter, but the game is still playable to around 25 fps, although we prefer 35fps.
Half-Life 2: Lost Coast
We use the built-in timedemo feature to benchmark the game. Our timedemo consists of starting at the bottom of the hill near the lake and ending in the old church. The Source engine timedemo feature is similar to the nettimedemo of Id's Doom 3 engine, in that it plays back more than just the graphics. The highest visual quality settings possible were used with HDR turned on. While the Source engine is notorious for giving great frame rates for almost any hardware setup, we find the game isn't as enjoyable if it isn't running at 35fps or above.
Quake 4
There has always been a lot of debate in the community surrounding pure timedemo benchmarking. We have opted to stick with the nettimedemo test rather than the timedemo option for motherboard benchmarking of Quake 4. To be clear, this means our test results focus mostly on the performance one would experience during actual game play. Additionally, Quake 4 limits frame rate to 60 fps during gameplay whether or not VSync is enabled. Our benchmark utilizes the IdNetDemo. This demo includes mainly outdoor areas with numerous players trying to wipe each other out. We tested the game with High Quality settings (uncompressed normal maps), and we enabled all the advanced graphics options except for VSync.
Serious Sam II
This benchmark is performed using Croteam's built-in demo capability in the Serious Sam II engine. We utilize the included Branchester Demo and capture the playback results using the Ctrl-~ function. The benchmark features a large number of combatants, explosions, and general mayhem. The benchmark is primarily GPU sensitive with the actual percentage of GPU/CPU/Audio activity being displayed during the benchmark run. We typically find this game is very playable at average in-game rates of 60 and above. We maximize all settings except antialiasing and anisotropic filtering within the general and advanced video settings.
FPS Gaming Summary
Our test results basically speak for themselves. If you utilize the same chipset you can expect the same results during benchmark testing. The differences between each board are minor and during actual game play we could not tell any differences amongst the motherboards tested today. We did not experience any issues during testing or during game play with each board. We generally play games for a couple of hours with each board to ensure there are no issues such as overheating, stuttering, or network issues when playing on-line. The one result that did catch our eye is that the performance of the Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3 was very consistent throughout testing as the board scored near or at the top in every game. We attribute this to Gigabyte programming in slightly tighter memory and MCH timings than the other manufacturers. Of course this is affecting their overclocking capability at this time.
62 Comments
View All Comments
smn198 - Monday, October 23, 2006 - link
Would you be able to re-run using 4 drives for all of the tests please?
jonp - Sunday, October 22, 2006 - link
-- “…budget sector and includes boards from ECS, Foxconn, Intel, and Gigabyte.” – will the MSI P965 Neo-F be in this set?-- the Abit AB9 Pro feature set does not show the eSata port on the SI 3132 (two SATA). it does show a serial port on the i/o panel but not one in the picture.
-- The Biostar feature set shows 4 USB on the i/o panel when there are six in the picture.
JarredWalton - Sunday, October 22, 2006 - link
Fixed - thanks.powchi - Saturday, October 21, 2006 - link
Can I use a 20-pin power supply on these boards since all are using 24-pin connectors? Or will I be needing 20pin to 24pin adaptor?The PSU is an Enermax NoiseTaker EG475P-VE SFMA 470W ATX 12V v1.3.
Aikouka - Sunday, October 22, 2006 - link
Some motherboard manufacturers will no longer support your motherboard if they find out you've been running it with a 20-pin ATX plug or a 20->24-pin adapter. Just be safe and get a newer PSU :). I know DFI will no longer support the motherboard if it specifically asks for a 24-pin.JarredWalton - Saturday, October 21, 2006 - link
Technically, yes you can use 20-pin PSUs. Will they work, and will the system be stable? That varies. I haven't had any issues on the systems where I've done it, but if you do high overclocking it will likely become a serious issue.powchi - Saturday, October 21, 2006 - link
Jarred,So there's no need to use a 20pin to 24pin adaptor? What are the differences when using and not using an adaptor? Thanks.
lopri - Sunday, October 22, 2006 - link
No. As a matter of fact, the adapter should be avoided. Just plug the 20-pin connector to 24-pin receptacle with 4-pin left empty. Like Jarred said, it should work in theory and it does in practice. However, the quality of PSU and how intense is one's OC can affect the (long-term) stability.JarredWalton - Sunday, October 22, 2006 - link
I suppose the adapter *could* help, as it ensures power is available on all the 24-pins, but you're still taking the power from the same source so depending on how that works out it can actually make things worse. I would typically say that if you have a 400W or better PSU you should be fine with little to moderate OC'ing even with 20-pins. (I have an OCZ ModStream 450W that certainly works fine in a 939 board with a decent 2.0 to 2.6 GHz overclock.)lopri - Sunday, October 22, 2006 - link
Yes! Not to brag about myself or anything, but I went through countless Socket 939 Opterons on DFI NF4 SLI-D with original Antec TruePower EPS12V (20-pins, not the TP2 with 24-pins) including an Opteron 165 @3.0GHz (9x333). TCCD up to 325MHz/2.5-4-3-8! The setup was absolutely stable.