Gigabyte 8ANXP-D: Features and Layout


 Gigabyte 8ANXP-D Motherboard Specifications
CPU Interface Socket 775 Pentium 4 (Prescott)
Chipset Intel 925X/ICH6R
Bus Speeds 100MHz to 355MHz (in 1MHz increments)
PCI Speeds To CPU, 33.33, Auto
DDR2 Speeds Auto, 2.0, 2.66
Core Voltage 0.8375 to 1.60V in 0.0125V increments
DRAM Voltage Auto, +.1, +.2, +.3
PCI Express Voltage Auto, +.1, +.2, +.3
Memory Slots Six 240-pin DDR2 Slots
Dual-Channel Unbuffered Memory to 4GB
Expansion Slots 1 PCIe x16 Slot
3 PCIe x1 slot
2 PCI Slots
Onboard SATA/IDE RAID 4 SATA 150 drives by ICH6R
Can be combined in RAID 0,1,Intel Matrix
plus 4 SATA ports by Sil3114 RAID 0, 1
Onboard IDE One Standard ATA100/66
(2 drives)
Onboard USB 2.0/IEEE-1394 8 USB 2.0 ports
3 IEEE 1394b FireWire Ports by TSB81BA3
Onboard LAN Gigabit Ethernet by Marvel 8001 PCI
PLUS PCIe Gigabit LAN by Broadcom 5751
Onboard Audio Realtek ALC880
8-Channel with SPDIF in/out
Wireless LAN WiFi 802.11g Included
Tested BIOS F3j

The Gigabyte 8ANXP-D, like the Asus P5AD2 Premium, is a top-line board loaded with features and designed to sell for a premium price. Gigabyte includes their trademark Dual-Power module to provide 8-phase power to the 8ANXP-D. Gigabyte has redesigned the Dual-Power module, making it lower profile and locating it between the ports and the CPU where it will not interfere with airflow to/from the CPU. More than any other manufacturer, Gigabyte tends to load their top motherboards with every feature but the kitchen sink, and in this regard, it is definitely a loaded motherboard.

Like several other boards in the roundup, the 8ANXP-D provides Dual Gigabit LAN connections, the Broadcom attached to the faster PCI Express bus and the Marvel attached to the PCI bus. Like the Asus, Gigabyte also provides 8 total SATA ports by adding a Silicon Image 3114 controller in addition to the 4 ports supported by ICH6R. It was a little surprising, considering Gigabyte's usual abundance of ports, that they decided to stick with the single IDE port supporting just 2 IDE devices.

Gigabyte was the first manufacturer to support on-board fast Firewire "b" ports and 3 1394B ports are included on the 8ANXP-D. Gigabyte also fully supports the Realtek ALC880 high-definition audio codec, which interfaces the Intel HD audio (Azalia).

Gigabyte also provides a wide range of overclocking options in BIOS with useful ranges for the typical overclocker. Memory voltage can be adjusted to 2.1V from 1.8V, a wider range than Gigabyte usually provides for memory. The FSB, CPU voltage, and PCI Express voltage also have ranges that are useful for overclockers. Gigabyte does not provide any BIOS options for PCI Express clocks, so you will need to depend on the board to make adjustments for you to get past the 10% overclock roadblock.



Gigabyte provides 6 DIMM slots, but the total memory and number of sides that can be used is the same as the other boards in the roundup. To populate all 6 slots, 4 of the DDR2 DIMMs need to be single-sided. The 6 slots are useful in that you can at least use your single-sided memory to reach 4GB, but the amount of memory and maximum number of banks are the same as the other designs. Layout of the Gigabyte generally works well, and we do like the pull release for the PCIe x16 slot. All you have to do is mount and unmount a 2-slot nVidia 6800 Ultra to learn to hate the push lever design.

There are a couple of things that could definitely be improved on the layout of the Gigabyte, however. The IDE and floppy connectors are at the end of the PCIe video slot, a terrible location. What makes it worse is a long card, like the nVidia 6 series, falls right between the floppy and IDE connector, making cable routing to mount and unmount the video card a real pain with a long video card. The 24-pin power connector is fine at the upper right edge, but the 4-pin 12 volt sits almost in the center left of the board. That makes snaking the 12V cable around the CPU in most case designs extremely difficult. It was easier to hang the cable over the CPU in our mid-tower case where it got caught in the powerful Intel CPU fan a couple of times. You can work around these two issues, but they can definitely be improved upon. Otherwise, the layout works fine in most cases.

Foxconn 925A01: Overclocking and Stress Testing Gigabyte 8ANXP-D: Overclocking and Stress Testing
Comments Locked

30 Comments

View All Comments

  • jdoor0 - Tuesday, October 26, 2004 - link

    This review has been reviewed:
    http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=18896
  • Nige - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link

    Does the ASUS P5AD2 Deluxe motherboard have the same overclocking capability as the P5AD2 Premium?
  • skiboysteve - Friday, August 13, 2004 - link

    Wow nice catch. i guess my "(I know... toms sucks)" disclaimer came true.


    yaeh i understand.
  • Wesley Fink - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link

    #26 -
    There is now an apology to Asus up at THG. They measured the voltage wrong. We had also measured the voltage and found 1.5 to 1.55 which is well within spec, not 2.1 as they reported. They now acknowledge the correct voltage measurement for the P5AD2 is 1.53V.

    High Northbridge voltage is not the reason the Asus, or any other 925X/915 board, overclocks well. There are far too many simple and wrong explanations for the complex overclocking issues of the 925X/915 chipsets.
  • skiboysteve - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link

    Page 10
    "...Broadcom attached to the faster PCI Express bus..."

    there is no PCI Express bus, its a point to point protocal.

    Just nitpicking.

    Great review.



    Also, over at Toms (I know... toms sucks) they looked at 9x5 Boards over there and showed that the Asus P5AD2 was running at an astounding 2.1v on the northbridge (1.5v is the stock)

    Something might have to be mentioned about reliability of such out of spec behavior, and cooling concerns. You might want to conduct your own quick test on the voltage with a multimeter.
  • broberts - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link

    One of the problems with these arguments is that the FX-53 is almost 20% more expensive.

    I've been thinking for a while now that benchmarks should show some form of pricing index so that one can better judge the advantage/disadvantage of the various choices. Just quoting prices isn't ideal, for a host of reasons. I'd suggest, instead, a relative measure. And not just the cost of the particular component being benchmarked. Calculate the cost of the each system used in the benchmarks. Pick one, perhaps the lowest or highest cost one and calculate the relative difference in price. I suggest using the entire system because quite often the choice of one component dictates the available choices for other components. Ideally a relative measure for both the components and entire system would be calculated and published.
  • manno - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link

    Moo Moo MOO.
  • manno - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link

    why no Doom3?
  • Wesley Fink - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link

    #21 -
    We will definitely be including Doom 3 benches in future reviews. The only reason they are not included in this 925X roundup is because most of the testing was completed before we had a working copy of Doom 3. You can get a clear idea of how the 925X/Intel 560 performs in Doom 3 in Anand's Doom 3: CPU Battlegrounds review published August 4th at http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...
  • kherman - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link

    Umm, Doom 3 benches?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now