Intel DX79SI Review: The Default X79?
by Ian Cutress on November 18, 2011 1:10 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
- Intel
- X79
Test Setup
| Processor |
Intel Sandy Bridge-E i7-3960X 6 Cores, 12 Threads, 3.3 GHz (3.9 GHz Turbo) |
| Motherboards | Intel DX79SI 'Siler' |
| Cooling | Intel All-In-One Liquid Cooler, made by Asetek |
| Power Supply | Silverstone 1000W 80 PLUS Silver |
| Memory | G.Skill RipjawsZ DDR3-2133 9-11-9 28 4x4 GB Kit 1.65V |
| Memory Settings | XMP |
| Video Cards |
XFX HD 5850 1GB ECS GTX 580 1536MB |
| Video Drivers |
Catalyst 11.8 NVIDIA Drivers 285.62 |
| Hard Drive | Micron RealSSD C300 256GB |
| Optical Drive | LG GH22NS50 |
| Case | Open Test Bed - CoolerMaster Lab V1.0 |
| Operating System | Windows 7 64-bit |
| SATA Testing | Micron RealSSD C300 256GB |
| USB 2/3 Testing | Patriot 64GB SuperSonic USB 3.0 |
Comparison to Other Reviews
Where applicable, the results in this review are directly compared to the following chipsets and boards which we have reviewed previously.
Power Consumption
Power consumption was tested on the system as a whole with a wall meter connected to the power supply, while in a dual GPU configuration. This method allows us to compare the power management of the UEFI and the board to supply components with power under load, and includes typical PSU losses due to efficiency. These are the real world values that consumers may expect from a typical system (minus the monitor) using this motherboard.
CPU Temperatures
With most users’ running boards on purely default BIOS settings, we are running at default settings for the CPU temperature tests. This is, in our outward view, an indication of how well (or how adventurous) the vendor has their BIOS configured on automatic settings. With a certain number of vendors not making CPU voltage, turbo voltage or LLC options configurable to the end user, which would directly affect power consumption and CPU temperatures at various usage levels, we find the test appropriate for the majority of cases. This does conflict somewhat with some vendors' methodology of providing a list of 'suggested' settings for reviewers to use. But unless those settings being implemented automatically for the end user, all these settings do for us it attempt to skew the results, and thus provide an unbalanced 'out of the box' result list to the readers who will rely on those default settings to make a judgment.
As with the ASUS P9X79 Pro I've reviewed, using something very CPU stressful, even on the Intel Liquid Cooler, makes the CPU temperatures shoot up even outside of a case.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
60 Comments
View All Comments
mdreed - Friday, November 18, 2011 - link
I had no idea Intel made their own mobos.mooninite - Friday, November 18, 2011 - link
*eye squint*Not sure if troll...
mygocarp - Friday, November 18, 2011 - link
I wasn't aware either.Granted, I don't really follow MBs much.
kmmatney - Friday, November 18, 2011 - link
They have pretty much been the world's biggest motherboard maker over the last 15 years or so. FoxConn used to make a lot of Intel branded motherboards in the past.Samus - Friday, November 18, 2011 - link
How can you not know Intel made their own motherboards? Even AMD at one point made a few boards to launch the K7 platform.I'm pretty sure Foxconn STILL manufactures Intel's boards, to Intel specification. All the components and connectors are usually Foxconn. You never see Amphenol and rarely see Molex-branded components. The PCB's usually have a Foxconn tag on an underside corner, indicating at least the PCB is manufactured by Foxconn.
vol7ron - Saturday, November 19, 2011 - link
He has to be a troll. What do we call comments trolls leave? Troop (troll poop, or the stuff trolls leave)?The first motherboard available for the Core2 series for months was an Intel brand, followed by ASUS and whomever else.
inighthawki - Saturday, November 19, 2011 - link
Or, maybe he's just an average tech user who browses a site like newegg and only knows of the more popular brands like ASUS, Gigabyte, etc. Intel may make a lot of boards, but that doesn't make them the most well known. Even I forgot until I read the article.vol7ron - Sunday, November 20, 2011 - link
I guess anything is possible, but I have to negate it with the probability of an average tech user leaving the first post.While it's possible he could be just some average user browsing some article on a site that he's kind of familiar with, or that he really just hadn't heard about Intel boards, since they are more known for their procs (and now SSDs); there are many readers here that subscribe to the RSS, that are generally the first to leave comments. I guess what I'm saying is that it's highly unlikely some average user would leave the first post, whereas that is generally reserved for those that keep up with the tech news. What do you think?
inighthawki - Sunday, November 20, 2011 - link
I just think you guys are being a little ridiculous that he's trolling and genuinely didn't know something. It's possible for even a more advanced tech user to have just never seen something before.Havor - Monday, November 21, 2011 - link
I have build over 500 PCs and only about 10 times have i used a Intel boards.All on request and 3 times it was for a server.
It comes from the old days, when chipsets ware big influence on performance, as all Intel mobos from ware 5~10% slower the ASUS or Abit or whomever.
But Intel never had a great name when it came to get the most out of there own chipsets!
And if you go to a e-seller, you only find Intel boards, some ware hidden away.
As there are people that prevere to have a "genuine" Intel board, from Foxconn ^_^