Intel Z77 Panther Point Chipset and Motherboard Preview – ASRock, ASUS, Gigabyte, MSI, ECS and Biostar
by Ian Cutress on April 8, 2012 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
- Intel
- Biostar
- MSI
- Gigabyte
- ASRock
- Asus
- Ivy Bridge
- ECS
- Z77
Features To Watch Out For
A few of the products listed here have some exciting new features and technologies, and the respective companies are quite proud of these. A lot of the time when a company advertises a 'unique' feature, it is a load of marketing fluff, but this time round I think a few of them are worth a mention.
ASRock BIOS Update from Internet within BIOS
ASRock have a new software technology coming along to aid BIOS updating. Their feature, as I've been told, will allow users to press a button in the BIOS which will let the motherboard connect to the internet, get and download the latest BIOS, then apply it. All at the touch of a button. Sounds good, right?
A little caveat: it will be for Ethernet wired connections only, where programs are not needed to access the internet, or through an ICS terminal. This may not be available with launch BIOSes, but should be a feature across their Z77 range soon.
ASUS T-Topology Memory
ASUS have outsmarted Intel and have decided to take their technology to another level. This is specifically in terms of memory, and how it is routed through the motherboard. Typically, routing through the memory would occur in a daisy chain type environment, whereby if data was in the furthest memory slot away from the board, it would take longer to get to the CPU, and perhaps cause synchronization issues and delays—all reads had to be done serially between sticks in the same channel.
With ASUS' new technology, they are essentially parallelizing memory reads that are commonly done serially between memory banks. This is part of their 'T-Topology' memory subsystem, which allows synchronization to be dealt with in hardware. This, according to ASUS, should allow for up to a 15% memory overclock beyond the previous methodology, where the motherboard is the limiting factor. In this circumstance, we could be seeing some new memory records being set in dual channel memory.
I have probed ASUS for specific details on how this works, and I am awaiting a response. I hope that by the time we are allowed to release our Ivy Bridge results on Z77 that I will have something more technical to pass on to you about how this works.
ASUS UASP Technology
While not strictly speaking a new technology, ASUS is the first to implement new USB protocols in Windows 7 under Intel platforms. Current USB protocols are very limited, insisting transfers are serial and rigorously monitored. ASRock first broke that with their XFast USB software (note, this was licensed to ASRock), which essentially implemented a new driver protocol. This had beneficial results on USB 2.0 and USB 3.0 transfers, both peak and in regular use. However, ASUS have gone one-step further.
Their software, enabled in X79, implements UASP, which stands for 'USB Attached SCSI Protocol'. This allows the operating system to use the SCSI command set for transferring data across the interface—this at the basic level involves command queuing, out of order execution, and hardware support for streams across USB 3.0.
To take advantage of UASP required a UASP compliant device, typically a modern USB 3.0 device using certain controllers. Unfortunately, that is a requirement of the protocol, not of the hardware itself. But hopefully this time around we will be able to test just how good it is, and whether your next USB 3.0 device will be able to take advantage of an ASUS only feature.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
145 Comments
View All Comments
Iketh - Sunday, April 8, 2012 - link
"handling input in a game engine" means nothing here. What matters is when your input is reflected in a rendered image and displayed on your monitor. That involves the entire package. Lucid basically prevents GPUs from rendering an image that won't get displayed in its entirety, allowing the GPU to begin work on the next image, effectively narrowing the gap from your input to the screen.extide - Tuesday, April 10, 2012 - link
I am sure he knows that. He was just giving a bit of detail as to his exact experience, of which I would bet is far more than most people on here. You have to be very aware of things such as latency and delay when you are handling input in a game engine. I agree with the OP and am skeptical also. The bit that makes me most curious is the transfer of the fully rendered screens from one framebuffer to the other, that has to add some latency, and probably enough to make the entire process worthless. It's not like Lucid has a good track record on stuff like this, I mean we all know how their cross platform SLI/CF took off and worked so well....Iketh - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link
Why would you need to physically copy framebuffers?? I'm sure pointers are used...I have no idea if this has tangible benefits, but theoretically it does. None of us know until we can test it. I'm more inclined to discredit the people already discrediting Lucid, despite Lucid's track record. That's what you call hating.
Iketh - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link
excuse me, you're right... it has to copy the frame from gpu to igpu... what kind of crap tech is this???ssj3gohan - Sunday, April 8, 2012 - link
Personally, I'm absolutely uninterested in anything 'high-performance', especially fancy gaming stuff. Not to say that I don't think that's a valid market niche, but I see other possibilities.I'm really looking forward to new thin ITX boards with built-in DC-DC converter (i.e. running directly off a 19V brick), and I am especially wondering whether Intel (or Zotac, possibly) is going to build a golden board this time around. Last time, they made DH61AG which was a nice board, but lacked an msata port (kind of a must for a truly thin computer) and 'only' had an H61 chipset.
With H77, I expect it will be possible to make a thin ITX board with USB 3.0 and a fast on-board SSD option, combining this with an HD 4000 equipped processor would enable users to build a truly thin (sub-4 inch thick) computer that fits on the back of their monitor but still provides ample computing power.
Senti - Sunday, April 8, 2012 - link
It sounds to me that Lucid Virtual V-Sync is just glorified triple buffering with a lot of marketing and a bit of overhead for transferring frames and powering two video cards instead of one. I'm very skeptical on the HyperFormance too.Cavalcade - Sunday, April 8, 2012 - link
It seems a bit more involved than triple buffering, more like having 2 buffers where the back buffer is not flipped until it is fully rendered. Seems like this would lead to more stuttering, and given the number of times they asked Mr. Cutress to reiterate that this would be a bug, it may be something they are seriously concerned with.Thinking about it a little more, I'm not sure what advantages this system would have over a system with separated input and rendering modules. The academic side of me is extremely interested and hopeful, but the practical developer side of me is going to require a lot more to be brought on board.
Iketh - Sunday, April 8, 2012 - link
Separate input and rendering modules, as I stated in an earlier post, means nothing. They allow for a responsive mouse cursor, for instance. But, when you actually provide input that alters the RENDERED WORLD, you have to wait for that input to reflect on screen. It doesn't matter how perfectly the software solution is architected, you still have to wait for the rendering of the image after your input.Lucid simply prevents renders that never get displayed in their entirety, allowing the GPU to work on the NEXT image, shortening the time from your input to the screen.
Cavalcade - Monday, April 9, 2012 - link
The comment was to indicate that while I have experience writing input systems, rendering is still relatively new to me; simply a qualifier of my impression and opinion.The way I am understanding Lucid, it is attempting to preempt displaying a frame that is not fully rendered in time for the next screen refresh. By presenting a virtual interface to both the GPU and the application, the application believes the frame has been rendered (displaying user input at that time) and proceeds to render the next frame. Thinking more about it, would this reduce the time interval between input reflected in frame one (which was preempted) and frame two (which will be displayed) so that rather than having input sampled at a fixed rate (say 60Hz) and displayed at a variable rate, input would be more closely tied to the frame for which it is intended.
My interest is rising, but it still seems like a rather complex solution to a problem that I either haven't experienced, or which doesn't really bother me.
Iketh - Tuesday, April 10, 2012 - link
it's not preemtively doing anything, except determining if a frame added to the queue will finish rendering in time... if not, it >>>>DOESNT LET THE GPU RENDER IT<<<< and places the previously rendered image in its place, allowing the GPU to immediately begin work on the FOLLOWING frame... that's it... it cuts unneeded frames from queuesas for your input sampling rate question, that's entirely based on how the application is coded to handle input, lucid has nothing to do with this...