Gigabyte GA-X38-DQ6: An early look at X38
by Gary Key on September 4, 2007 3:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Test Setup
Test conditions were maintained the same, as much as possible, over the platforms tested. Our game tests were run at settings of 1280x1024 HQ to ensure our MSI 8800GTX is not the bottleneck during testing. We utilized our MTRON MSD-S25032 32GB solid state drive for our PCMark05 and media encoding tests as we are trying to isolate any differences between the chipsets. All results are reported in our charts and color-coded for easier identification of results.
We selected the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 as our processor of choice since it represents one of the better price to performance values in the midrange processor market, and it is also the CPU we will focus on in future reviews. We are utilizing Microsoft Vista Home Premium 32-bit as our operating system along with a 4GB memory configuration. Even though Vista 32-bit cannot take advantage of the entire 4GB of memory address space (3.326GB), we found the additional 1.278GB of memory available provided improved performance during multitasking events and gaming. We would not recommend anything less than 2GB with Vista Home Premium. We will also provide select Vista 64-bit results in our full review.
We utilize new drive images on each board in order to minimize any potential driver conflicts. Our 3DMark results are generated utilizing the standard benchmark resolution for each program. We run each benchmark five times, throw out the two low and high scores, and report the remaining score. All results at stock speeds for this article are with memory timings at 4-4-4-12 (DDR2-1066) and at 5-5-5-18 (DDR2-1200) for our overclocking tests. Where possible, memory sub-timings were set exactly the same to ensure consistency between the two chipsets.
Our choice of software applications to test is based on programs that enjoy widespread use and produce repeatable and consistent results during testing. Microsoft Vista has thrown a monkey wrench into testing as the aggressive nature of the operating system to constantly optimize application loading and retrieval from memory or the storage system presents some interesting obstacles. This along with the lack of driver maturity or features will continue to present problems in the near future with benchmark selections.
Our normal process is to change our power settings to performance, delete the contents of the prefetch folder, and then reboot after each benchmark run. This is a lengthy process, but it results in consistency over the course of benchmark testing. All applications are run with administer privileges.
| Gigabyte GA-X38-DQ6 / abit IP-35 Pro Testbed | |
| Processor | Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 Quad Core, 2.4GHz, 2x4MB Unified Cache, 9x266 1066FSB |
| CPU Voltage | 1.2V |
| Cooling | Tuniq Tower 120 |
| Power Supply | Cooler Master Real Power Pro 1000W |
| Memory | OCZ Flex PC2-9600 (4x1GB) |
| Memory Settings | 4-4-4-12 (1066, 2.25V), 5-5-5-18 (1200 2.30V) |
| Video Cards | MSI 8800GTX |
| Video Drivers | NVIDIA 163.44 |
| Hard Drive | Seagate DB35.3 7200RPM 750GB SATA 3/Gbps 16MB Buffer |
| Optical Drives | Plextor PX-B900A, Toshiba SD-H802A |
| Audio Card | ASUS Xonar D2 |
| Audio Drivers | ASUS 5.12.01.0008.17.19 |
| Case | Cooler Master Stacker 830 Evo |
| BIOS | Gigabyte D19 (engineering BIOS), abit M629B12.B02 |
| Operating System | Windows Vista Home Premium 32-bit |
| . | |
Test conditions were maintained the same, as much as possible, over the platforms tested. Our game tests were run at settings of 1280x1024 HQ to ensure our MSI 8800GTX is not the bottleneck during testing. We utilized our MTRON MSD-S25032 32GB solid state drive for our PCMark05 and media encoding tests as we are trying to isolate any differences between the chipsets. All results are reported in our charts and color-coded for easier identification of results.
We selected the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 as our processor of choice since it represents one of the better price to performance values in the midrange processor market, and it is also the CPU we will focus on in future reviews. We are utilizing Microsoft Vista Home Premium 32-bit as our operating system along with a 4GB memory configuration. Even though Vista 32-bit cannot take advantage of the entire 4GB of memory address space (3.326GB), we found the additional 1.278GB of memory available provided improved performance during multitasking events and gaming. We would not recommend anything less than 2GB with Vista Home Premium. We will also provide select Vista 64-bit results in our full review.
We utilize new drive images on each board in order to minimize any potential driver conflicts. Our 3DMark results are generated utilizing the standard benchmark resolution for each program. We run each benchmark five times, throw out the two low and high scores, and report the remaining score. All results at stock speeds for this article are with memory timings at 4-4-4-12 (DDR2-1066) and at 5-5-5-18 (DDR2-1200) for our overclocking tests. Where possible, memory sub-timings were set exactly the same to ensure consistency between the two chipsets.
Our choice of software applications to test is based on programs that enjoy widespread use and produce repeatable and consistent results during testing. Microsoft Vista has thrown a monkey wrench into testing as the aggressive nature of the operating system to constantly optimize application loading and retrieval from memory or the storage system presents some interesting obstacles. This along with the lack of driver maturity or features will continue to present problems in the near future with benchmark selections.
Our normal process is to change our power settings to performance, delete the contents of the prefetch folder, and then reboot after each benchmark run. This is a lengthy process, but it results in consistency over the course of benchmark testing. All applications are run with administer privileges.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
26 Comments
View All Comments
jay401 - Tuesday, September 4, 2007 - link
How does it compare to the previous gen motherboards almost everyone is running?Is it really worth an upgrade from 650i/680i/P965/975X?
That's really what matters.
TA152H - Tuesday, September 4, 2007 - link
The chart "Media encoding - Sony Vegas" makes no sense. I think you got the stock performances twisted.Also three to five percent over the P35 sounds incredible, as in not credible. Especially with the Penryn (with it's bigger cache). When the motherboard makers talk this, you should try to find out what processor they are talking about. Maybe on a 512K processor it can reach it, but on a 4 MB processor, on most benchmarks, it doesn't sound realistic at all. Well, it also depends what they are comparing it to. It says the P35, but maybe they meant the 975X, which is much more likely. Crossfire, of course, will be much higher, but how many people are actually using this? It's a very, very low percentage. So, I think people are going to be disappointed again, like they were with the Penryn, because of misguided expectations. Penryn, like x38, is a great product, it's a shame people lose that because of these unrealistic expectations. Still, anything is possible, but if it averages 4% on most applications against the P35, on a Penryn (will enthusiasists buy the Conroe when it comes out?), I'd be very surprised.
One suggestion, when you do the final review, run it with a Conroe-L as well. Why would an enthusiast site run this as well? Well, if I needed a machine, right now (as in I had one computer and it died), I would buy it for $40 and then buy a Penryn when it became available, or cheap, and then use it in a low power computer. You might see the 3-5% claim have a chance on a small cache processor. That's probably what they were talking about, without actually wanting to say it.
phusg - Tuesday, September 4, 2007 - link
Sounds an interesting upgrade path. But aren't Conroe-L's the Celeron 4xx's which are socket 478? Do we even know what socket Penryn will be?
TA152H - Tuesday, September 4, 2007 - link
Conroe-L is LGA 775, same as Penryn will be. I suspect almost any motherboard being made now will work with the Penryn, or whatever the desktop version is called, really. I can't keep up with these stupid names AMD and Intel come up with for their processors. The ass that thought of Barcelona should be sterilized. What an absurd name. If they had any brains they might make code names and add something like -L for light, -M for mobile, -S for server, -QM for Quad Mobile, etc...Instead, they have these horrendous code names, which are suitably replaced by horrendous model numbers. I really can't keep track. Pentium III 1 GHz was so much easier to remember.
Guuts - Tuesday, September 4, 2007 - link
Gary,Page 2: Third paragraph from the bottom, should have (DDR2-1066) and not (DDR-1066).
Page 3: Missing graphic at the top of the page, text starting off with "memory-lg.png memory-sm.png" is probably the cause?
Page 5: Chart 2 (Sony Vegas) either has the stock speed bars' labels reversed, or your text summary is incorrect, as the chart doesn't show the Gigabyte board ahead in both stock and overclocked speeds.
Page 7: Second paragraph, last sentence, "...better than several retails boards" should just be "retail".
Good article overall, though I was expecting a bit more of an improvement over the P35. I bet there will be a nice boost over the 975X when we see the full review, however. Thanks for the early look, Gary.
Now...where is the P35 board roundup? :-p
JarredWalton - Tuesday, September 4, 2007 - link
Hi - sorry about the graph missing... that was my mistake. You can blame me for a few other missed typos as well if you'd like. I'm not sure on the Sony Vegas chart if there's some sort of labeling error or if we need to correct the text, so I'm leaving it alone.--Jarred