As an interesting dynamic to our testing, it has been requested that we see how well the C2750 does in our discrete GPU benchmarks. The combination of a slower CPU and limited PCIe bandwidth will be the major culprit in almost all our benchmarks, although Tomb Raider is at least on an even keel. Most of our benchmarks show a 30+ FPS frame rate, if you are willing to pair a large GPU with the C2750D4I.  Again, we are currently testing other 25W platforms to provide more applicable competition for this platform.

F1 2013

First up is F1 2013 by Codemasters. I am a big Formula 1 fan in my spare time, and nothing makes me happier than carving up the field in a Caterham, waving to the Red Bulls as I drive by (because I play on easy and take shortcuts). F1 2013 uses the EGO Engine, and like other Codemasters games ends up being very playable on old hardware quite easily. In order to beef up the benchmark a bit, we devised the following scenario for the benchmark mode: one lap of Spa-Francorchamps in the heavy wet, the benchmark follows Jenson Button in the McLaren who starts on the grid in 22nd place, with the field made up of 11 Williams cars, 5 Marussia and 5 Caterham in that order. This puts emphasis on the CPU to handle the AI in the wet, and allows for a good amount of overtaking during the automated benchmark. We test at 1920x1080 on Ultra graphical settings.

F1 2013: 1080p Max, 1x GTX 770

F1 2013, 1080p Max
  NVIDIA AMD
Average Frame Rates
Minimum Frame Rates

Bioshock Infinite

Bioshock Infinite was Zero Punctuation’s Game of the Year for 2013, uses the Unreal Engine 3, and is designed to scale with both cores and graphical prowess. We test the benchmark using the Adrenaline benchmark tool and the Xtreme (1920x1080, Maximum) performance setting, noting down the average frame rates and the minimum frame rates.

Bioshock Infinite: 1080p Max, 1x GTX 770

Bioshock Infinite, 1080p Max
  NVIDIA AMD
Average Frame Rates
Minimum Frame Rates

During our Bioshock Infinite test there was a clear stutter during the benchmark that would make the game completely unplayable.

Tomb Raider

The next benchmark in our test is Tomb Raider. Tomb Raider is an AMD optimized game, lauded for its use of TressFX creating dynamic hair to increase the immersion in game. Tomb Raider uses a modified version of the Crystal Engine, and enjoys raw horsepower. We test the benchmark using the Adrenaline benchmark tool and the Xtreme (1920x1080, Maximum) performance setting, noting down the average frame rates and the minimum frame rates.

Tomb Raider: 1080p Max, 1x GTX 770

Tomb Raider, 1080p Max
  NVIDIA AMD
Average Frame Rates
Minimum Frame Rates

Tomb Raider is a game that seems to move almost entirely onto the GPU, not worrying much about the CPU or the DRAM attached to it.

Scientific and Synthetic Benchmarks Gaming Benchmarks: Sleeping Dogs, Company of Heroes 2 and Battlefield 4
Comments Locked

85 Comments

View All Comments

  • Marquis - Tuesday, April 29, 2014 - link

    Nevermind, reading comprehension FTW. The other two are mentioned later....
  • bombshelter - Tuesday, April 29, 2014 - link

    Your comment about the reason for using the PLX switch is wrong. First, the PEX8608 is an 8-lane switch and they are using it in a x4 (from CPU) to 4 x1s (to PCIe end-points) topology. The Avoton CPU actually has a total of 16 PCIe lanes, but can only bifurcate to 4 controllers. So the real reason they are using the PLX switch is to be able to have more than 4 PCIe end-points connected to the CPU. There will be no performance degradation or sharing of bandwidth due to the presence of the PLX switch since there is an equal number of lanes going into it from the CPU as as there are end-points connected on the downstream side.
  • Ian Cutress - Tuesday, April 29, 2014 - link

    Aha, yes my interpretation of the chipset diagram was a little off. Going to update the review.
  • chang3d - Tuesday, April 29, 2014 - link

    Supermicro has two similar board with a few differences of SO-DIMM, USB 3, 4 NICs, and 6 sata headers. It's also cheaper. I think the features of this board is much better than this ASRock board.

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...
  • ddriver - Tuesday, April 29, 2014 - link

    Is it just me or was this review an extremely bad match to that product? What about NAS performance, which undoubtedly will be one of the major selling points? Instead we get gaming on a product as far from gaming as it gets. And content creation?
  • Ian Cutress - Tuesday, April 29, 2014 - link

    According to users on several forums, this board has been the focus of many different types of build. I've done a brief analysis here of usability and interface, but Ganesh is our storage guru and has all the equipment for storage related tests, so I'd rather leave that in his court for a follow-up review rather than fumble through them myself.
  • ddriver - Wednesday, April 30, 2014 - link

    No offense, but you have reviewed a rake as a back scratcher :)

    With such massive storage capacity, dual gigabit onboard, up to 64 GB of ECC ram - computational performance is irrelevant, this product is all about throughput. While it may be viewed as somewhat beneficial to get concrete numbers, yet after all the numbers only confirm this product ain't neither about gaming nor about content creation, so if anything the review is useful at proving its uselessness, which makes it technically useful - which is quite a nice paradox ;)
  • LastQuark - Monday, May 5, 2014 - link

    It's not you. This is perfect to me for what this board is intended for - virtualization, NAS, home web server, backup, even good enough for a Plex or XMBC server. The review made it seem like it is for HTPC and gaming which it is not.
  • DuckieHo - Tuesday, April 29, 2014 - link

    Drop the AST2300 for management.
    Drop BMC/SMB.
    Drop IPMB.
    Drop TPM.
    Drop COM port.
    Reduce fan ports (6 PWM to 4 PWM).
    Drop a SATA controller (12 ports to 8 or 10).
    Increase the size of the heatsink and/or add a fan.

    Drop the price in half for a consumer version please!
  • Rick83 - Tuesday, April 29, 2014 - link

    There's a quad-core version of the same board at 3/4 the price. That should be enough for most home users. It's also a 14W part, so has less cooling needs.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now