Computation Benchmarks

Readers of our motherboard review section will have noted the trend in modern motherboards to implement a form of MultiCore Enhancement / Acceleration / Turbo (read our report here) on their motherboards.  This does several things – better benchmark results at stock settings (not entirely needed if overclocking is an end-user goal), at the expense of heat and temperature, but also gives in essence an automatic overclock which may be against what the user wants.  Our testing methodology is ‘out-of-the-box’, with the latest public BIOS installed and XMP enabled, and thus subject to the whims of this feature. It is ultimately up to the motherboard manufacturer to take this risk – and manufacturers taking risks in the setup is something they do on every product (think C-state settings, USB priority, DPC Latency / monitoring priority, memory subtimings at JEDEC).  Processor speed change is part of that risk which is clearly visible, and ultimately if no overclocking is planned, some motherboards will affect how fast that shiny new processor goes and can be an important factor in the purchase.

For reference, the MSI Z87 XPower does apply MCT when XMP is enabled.

Point Calculations - 3D Movement Algorithm Test

The algorithms in 3DPM employ both uniform random number generation or normal distribution random number generation, and vary in various amounts of trigonometric operations, conditional statements, generation and rejection, fused operations, etc.  The benchmark runs through six algorithms for a specified number of particles and steps, and calculates the speed of each algorithm, then sums them all for a final score.  This is an example of a real world situation that a computational scientist may find themselves in, rather than a pure synthetic benchmark.  The benchmark is also parallel between particles simulated, and we test the single thread performance as well as the multi-threaded performance.

3D Particle Movement Single Threaded3D Particle Movement MultiThreaded

While the MSI falls behind on our single threaded test, it does a reasonable job in multithreaded.

Compression - WinRAR 4.2

With 64-bit WinRAR, we compress the set of files used in the USB speed tests. WinRAR x64 3.93 attempts to use multithreading when possible, and provides as a good test for when a system has variable threaded load.  WinRAR 4.2 does this a lot better! If a system has multiple speeds to invoke at different loading, the switching between those speeds will determine how well the system will do.

WinRAR 4.2

Again, MSI does well, this time on a variable threaded test.

Image Manipulation - FastStone Image Viewer 4.2

FastStone Image Viewer is a free piece of software I have been using for quite a few years now.  It allows quick viewing of flat images, as well as resizing, changing color depth, adding simple text or simple filters.  It also has a bulk image conversion tool, which we use here.  The software currently operates only in single-thread mode, which should change in later versions of the software.  For this test, we convert a series of 170 files, of various resolutions, dimensions and types (of a total size of 163MB), all to the .gif format of 640x480 dimensions.

FastStone Image Viewer 4.2

FastStone rarely shows much variation between motherboards.

Video Conversion - Xilisoft Video Converter 7

With XVC, users can convert any type of normal video to any compatible format for smartphones, tablets and other devices.  By default, it uses all available threads on the system, and in the presence of appropriate graphics cards, can utilize CUDA for NVIDIA GPUs as well as AMD WinAPP for AMD GPUs.  For this test, we use a set of 33 HD videos, each lasting 30 seconds, and convert them from 1080p to an iPod H.264 video format using just the CPU.  The time taken to convert these videos gives us our result.

Xilisoft Video Converter 7

Rendering – PovRay 3.7

The Persistence of Vision RayTracer, or PovRay, is a freeware package for as the name suggests, ray tracing.  It is a pure renderer, rather than modeling software, but the latest beta version contains a handy benchmark for stressing all processing threads on a platform. We have been using this test in motherboard reviews to test memory stability at various CPU speeds to good effect – if it passes the test, the IMC in the CPU is stable for a given CPU speed.  As a CPU test, it runs for approximately 2-3 minutes on high end platforms.

PovRay 3.7 Multithreaded Benchmark

Video Conversion - x264 HD Benchmark

The x264 HD Benchmark uses a common HD encoding tool to process an HD MPEG2 source at 1280x720 at 3963 Kbps.  This test represents a standardized result which can be compared across other reviews, and is dependent on both CPU power and memory speed.  The benchmark performs a 2-pass encode, and the results shown are the average of each pass performed four times.

x264 HD Benchmark Pass 1x264 HD Benchmark Pass 2

There is a surprising leap in performace for x264 in the first pass.

Grid Solvers - Explicit Finite Difference

For any grid of regular nodes, the simplest way to calculate the next time step is to use the values of those around it.  This makes for easy mathematics and parallel simulation, as each node calculated is only dependent on the previous time step, not the nodes around it on the current calculated time step.  By choosing a regular grid, we reduce the levels of memory access required for irregular grids.  We test both 2D and 3D explicit finite difference simulations with 2n nodes in each dimension, using OpenMP as the threading operator in single precision.  The grid is isotropic and the boundary conditions are sinks.  Values are floating point, with memory cache sizes and speeds playing a part in the overall score.

Explicit Finite Difference Grid Solver (2D)Explicit Finite Difference Grid Solver (3D)

Grid Solvers - Implicit Finite Difference + Alternating Direction Implicit Method

The implicit method takes a different approach to the explicit method – instead of considering one unknown in the new time step to be calculated from known elements in the previous time step, we consider that an old point can influence several new points by way of simultaneous equations.  This adds to the complexity of the simulation – the grid of nodes is solved as a series of rows and columns rather than points, reducing the parallel nature of the simulation by a dimension and drastically increasing the memory requirements of each thread.  The upside, as noted above, is the less stringent stability rules related to time steps and grid spacing.  For this we simulate a 2D grid of 2n nodes in each dimension, using OpenMP in single precision.  Again our grid is isotropic with the boundaries acting as sinks. Values are floating point, with memory cache sizes and speeds playing a part in the overall score.

Implicit Finite Difference Grid Solver (2D)

Point Calculations - n-Body Simulation

When a series of heavy mass elements are in space, they interact with each other through the force of gravity.  Thus when a star cluster forms, the interaction of every large mass with every other large mass defines the speed at which these elements approach each other.  When dealing with millions and billions of stars on such a large scale, the movement of each of these stars can be simulated through the physical theorems that describe the interactions. The benchmark detects whether the processor is SSE2 or SSE4 capable, and implements the relative code.  We run a simulation of 10240 particles of equal mass - the output for this code is in terms of GFLOPs, and the result recorded was the peak GFLOPs value.

n-body Simulation via C++ AMP

System Benchmarks Gaming Benchmarks
Comments Locked

35 Comments

View All Comments

  • DanNeely - Monday, August 12, 2013 - link

    You will. Most commonly they're 10 expansion slots high (the size of the first generation of extra large/tall mobos). Newegg carries 11 ten, 7 eleven, and 1 twelve slot tall cases vs 333 seven and 74 eight slot tall models.
  • peterwhitehouse - Monday, August 12, 2013 - link

    I think the form factor description is totally wrong surely it should be XL-ATX and not E-ATX?
  • DanNeely - Monday, August 12, 2013 - link

    That or HP-ATX; the other taller than normal board bucket. EATX is still 7 slots tall but somewhat wider to give room for two CPU sockets and ram banks in the top area.
  • Nfarce - Monday, August 12, 2013 - link

    Every time I see a Haswell tested and overclocked I cringe looking at the thermals. Even with an H70 this thing hits 85C at 4.7GHz. My 2500K stays at 4.8 on 1.39V at 60C in summer ambients on an ND-D14. Would like to upgrade to an i7 for video editing as well as a gaming, all-in-one system, but can't see that kind of heat happening. Maybe Ivy is the way to go for the last of the great overclocking chipsets?
  • Death666Angel - Monday, August 12, 2013 - link

    Have you listened to the Podcast #22 with Dustin Slavos? Anand and him discuss Haswell OCing very in depth, you should check it out.
    As it stands now, yes, you are thermally limited with Haswell. You currently get a little less OC headroom than with Ivy Bridge, but the IPC increase means you are still ~5% ahead in average work loads. When yields mature, you might see OC parity or even an increase, in which case Haswell will be about 10%+ better, sometimes more if the program takes advantage of the new features with Haswell. If you are to upgrade to a completely new system, get Haswell or Ivy-Bridge-E which should do better in the OCing department since it will likely use solder to connect the die and the IHS. I personally don't see the appeal to do an upgrade from one generation to the next these days, unless money isn't an issue.
    But, 85°C is not an issue for the CPU. If the system isn't louder because of Haswell, anything under 90°C should be okay. And unless the two system were identical, you can't compare your 60°C to the 85°C, the cooler are different, you have different fans, different care fans and different positioning, difference socket placement..... :)
  • Nfarce - Monday, August 12, 2013 - link

    "But, 85°C is not an issue for the CPU. If the system isn't louder because of Haswell, anything under 90°C should be okay. And unless the two system were identical, you can't compare your 60°C to the 85°C, the cooler are different, you have different fans, different care fans and different positioning, difference socket placement..... :)"

    I understand all of that of course. However, my summer temps - I live in the south of the US where it's hot nearly half the year - and my air conditioner bill would not like something cranking out 180F+ degrees. It's already hot enough in the room blowing 140F out the back with the Sandy rig combined with the 140F coming from GPUs. Bottom line - Haswell, while faster clock for clock than the Ivy which itself is faster clock for clock than Sandy, is not the "next level" I was hoping for. Finally, as stated, the only reason I'm looking to upgrade to i7 from i5 is to speed up my video editing and rendering time, which I'm doing more and more of these days.
  • basroil - Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - link

    Nfarce, it doesn't matter if you put 90W of heat into your apartment at 180F or at just 90F, your room temperature increases the same amount! In fact, those massive coolers actually draw so much more power that you'll actually increase temperatures. Don't spout nonsense like that, it's beyond ridiculous. If you care for cooler temperatures, go for the system that uses the fewest Watt average (including idle time), and that system will surely not include this mobo!
  • ggathagan - Monday, August 12, 2013 - link

    "$440 is a big ask from MSI, which is placated some by the inclusion of a mouse mat and goodies in the box."
    "Two thumbs up from MSI on the self-branded additions to the box."

    Seriously Ian?!

    $440 should buy me an amazingly solid board that will do what its manufacturer claims it will.

    Anything less is unacceptable and simply encourages board makers to continue this trend of cranking out their top tier products before they are actually ready for everyday use.

    Spare me the marketing material, the out-dated 2.4GhZ wireless the useless 'Killer' NIC and spend your time/money on producing a satisfactory motherboard!
  • C.C. - Monday, August 12, 2013 - link

    Dumb ass spammer..If she only makes $62 an hr, yet brought in $20,900 in a month..that "few hours" she worked totals 337 hours..If you are going to waste your time typing spam messages that everyone here is smart enough not to follow, then you *SHOULD* be smart enough to use a friggin' calculator Bahahah...

    On topic, ggathagan you are exactly right! $3 worth of useless marketing fluff doesn't really make you want run out and buy this board over others that are half price but perform just as well..For $440, this thing should come with a full set of custom waterblocks for the VRMs/chipset, and ship with a stable BIOS for God's sake! I really liked the platform offerings of Z87 on paper, but I am glad I held onto my 3770k @ 4.8Ghz..

    Every Z87 board seems to have their own slew of issues, from BIOS issues to XMP issues etc etc..My $115 ASRock Z77 Extreme4 has been rock solid from June 1st of 2012..It runs 24/7 @ 100% load (F@H), and is the BEST MB I have ever owned under $150..

    I used to buy nothing but higher end boards ($200-250), and am super glad I took a chance on this "mainstream" performance board! I sure hope Ivy-E brings some updated X79 boards (native USB 3, more SATA 6 ports, better Audio) so I have something to be excited about!
  • b3nzint - Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - link

    If u going to 4 way crossfire / sli or even 3 way, then where u put your sas card or any other pci xpress card? cause theres no pci xpress slot left available. This kinda boards is all about having multiple gpu but still got everything else.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now