Asus P5N32-SLI: Dual x16 - What Dreams Are Made On . . .
by Gary Key on October 27, 2005 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Disk Controller Performance
With the variety of disk drive benchmarks available, we needed a means of comparing the true performance of the wide selection of controllers. The logical choice was Anand's storage benchmark first described in Q2 2004 Desktop Hard Drive Comparison: WD Raptor vs. the World. To refresh your memory, the iPeak test was designed to measure "pure" hard disk performance, and in this case, we kept the hard drive as consistent as possible while varying the hard drive controller. The idea is to measure the performance of a hard drive controller with a consistent hard drive.
We played back Anand's raw files that recorded I/O operations when running a real world benchmark - the entire Winstone 2004 suite. Intel's iPEAK utility was then used to play back the trace file of all IO operations that took place during a single run of Business Winstone 2004 and MCC Winstone 2004. To try to isolate performance difference to the controllers that we were testing, we used the Maxtor MaXLine III 7L300S0 300GB 7200 RPM SATA drive in all tests . The drive was formatted before each test run and a composite average of 5 tests on each controller interface was tabulated in order to ensure consistency in the benchmark.
iPeak gives a mean service time in milliseconds; in other words, the average time that each drive took to fulfill each IO operation. In order to make the data more understandable, we report the scores as an average number of IO operations per second so that higher scores translate into better performance. This number is meaningless as far as hard disk performance is concerned as it is just the number of IO operations completed in a second. However, the scores are useful for comparing "pure" performance of the storage controllers in this case.
With the variety of disk drive benchmarks available, we needed a means of comparing the true performance of the wide selection of controllers. The logical choice was Anand's storage benchmark first described in Q2 2004 Desktop Hard Drive Comparison: WD Raptor vs. the World. To refresh your memory, the iPeak test was designed to measure "pure" hard disk performance, and in this case, we kept the hard drive as consistent as possible while varying the hard drive controller. The idea is to measure the performance of a hard drive controller with a consistent hard drive.
We played back Anand's raw files that recorded I/O operations when running a real world benchmark - the entire Winstone 2004 suite. Intel's iPEAK utility was then used to play back the trace file of all IO operations that took place during a single run of Business Winstone 2004 and MCC Winstone 2004. To try to isolate performance difference to the controllers that we were testing, we used the Maxtor MaXLine III 7L300S0 300GB 7200 RPM SATA drive in all tests . The drive was formatted before each test run and a composite average of 5 tests on each controller interface was tabulated in order to ensure consistency in the benchmark.
iPeak gives a mean service time in milliseconds; in other words, the average time that each drive took to fulfill each IO operation. In order to make the data more understandable, we report the scores as an average number of IO operations per second so that higher scores translate into better performance. This number is meaningless as far as hard disk performance is concerned as it is just the number of IO operations completed in a second. However, the scores are useful for comparing "pure" performance of the storage controllers in this case.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
70 Comments
View All Comments
Gary Key - Sunday, October 30, 2005 - link
Asus will be clarifying the supported range of CPUs with the Lock Free setting. I noticed a difference this weekend on the retail board and bios with a CPU stepping range I thought was fully supported. I know the EE series all work properly, the balance I am not sure of at this time.
Gary Key - Thursday, October 27, 2005 - link
It will allow you to go down to 14x only in my testing. I did not have an issue with the dual core cpus down to 14x or raising the 820D to 16x. However, I have a single core cpu coming and will verify the settings with it. Please email me so I can repsond to you directly.Spacecomber - Thursday, October 27, 2005 - link
I think a more to the point intro would have been to ask whether a $250 motherboard can make up for the shortcomings in the current line of Intel desktop processors and make them more attractive to the computer enthusiast.Then again, maybe people who are sticking with their Prescotts really are dreamers.
Gary Key - Thursday, October 27, 2005 - link
Good point and one that Intel finally understands but we will have to wait until next summer to see the results. :) However, this board does make up for some of the current Intel CPU shortcomings and is truly an enthusiast board for Intel customers.tuteja1986 - Thursday, October 27, 2005 - link
Asus were leader once and i think are going to take the leader crown again: )They have been getting good success with:
Dual GPU 7800GTX
Now This motherboard
Also they are working on 7300 go
Good work and keep it up
Bozo Galora - Thursday, October 27, 2005 - link
reads like an ad for asuswho the hell would use a current Intel cpu?
not the 80% of the people who come to AT
I'll take the upcoming (delayed again) DFI NF4 Expert mobo, thank you
Gary Key - Thursday, October 27, 2005 - link
If it means anything, I purchased a pair of these boards after I completed the initial testing to replace a couple of systems in our household. I am that confident in the board and its ability.
About 80%+ of the buying public currently although the numbers are greatly skewed in their favor by large OEM and Retail sales. Actually, the newer Intel products are decent performers at a good price point. However, I completly agree that AMD owns the performance market and should receive wider credit for their efforts over the past couple of years.
Agreed, but sometimes it is good to visit the other side of the fence. A few short years ago your statements would have held true for people with AMD systems. ;-)
An excellent choice but while you are waiting you could purchase this board now. :-)
karioskasra - Thursday, October 27, 2005 - link
Dreams are made on an Intel platform? Did I miss something here...Gary Key - Thursday, October 27, 2005 - link
If you have an Intel CPU, then no, you did not miss anything. ;->I fully understand the performance and cost advantages the current AMD64 platform has over Intel. However, this should not dismiss the fact that the NVIDIA nForce4 SLI platform along with the implementation of it by Asus is an excellent solution regardless of CPU choice.
I personally own several AMD64 platforms but in reality you would be hard pressed at this time to tell the difference in performance between the two without benchmarks. I realize there will be a small population that can but overall an current Intel based system is fine for gaming and applications.
ksherman - Thursday, October 27, 2005 - link
I REALLY like the fan less northbridge cooling setup... Wish my DFI had one like it. Esp. since my Zalman 7700 will keep those heasinks nice and cool...