Intel P965: The Double Mint Twins Gone Wild
by Gary Key on November 9, 2006 8:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
General System Performance
We devised a script that would compress our standard test folder consisting of 444 files, ten subfolders, and 602MB worth of data, convert a 137MB High Definition QuickTime movie clip to a 37MB MPEG-4 format, play back the first two chapters of Office Space with PowerDVD, and run our AVG anti-virus program in the background. We stop the script when the file compression and video conversion are complete. This is a very taxing script for the CPU, Memory, and Storage subsystem. We also found it to be a good indicator of system stability during our overclocking testing.
The performance difference basically mirrors our PCMark 2005 tests with the ASUS P965 boards scoring about 3% better overall in our multitasking test. We also see our Biostar 965PT board nipping on the heels of the ASUS boards and showing the results in PCMark 2005 were repeatable in this multitasking test. Both Gigabyte boards finish last which is surprising given their strength in our other benchmarks. As with our PCMark 2005 test both Gigabyte boards had issues with the virus scanning tests. We noticed in this test that our AVG anti-virus scan would stutter severely at various times during the tests.
PCMark 2005, together with two benchmarks that use rendering to test system performance - Cinebench 9.5 and POV-Ray 3.6 - has replaced Winstones for testing general performance. The Cinebench 9.5 and POV-RAY 3.6 benchmarks both heavily stress the CPU subsystem while performing graphics modeling and rendering. We utilize the standard benchmark demos in each program along with their default settings. Cinebench 9.5 features two different benchmarks with one test utilizing a single core and the second test using the power of multiple cores to render the benchmark image. We utilize the dual core test for our results.
We see our collection of Biostar and Gigabyte boards taking top honors in these benchmarks although all of the scores are extremely close. We continue to see a pattern where the P965 boards at stock speeds are scoring slightly better than our 975X and NVIDIA 570SLI offerings.
We devised a script that would compress our standard test folder consisting of 444 files, ten subfolders, and 602MB worth of data, convert a 137MB High Definition QuickTime movie clip to a 37MB MPEG-4 format, play back the first two chapters of Office Space with PowerDVD, and run our AVG anti-virus program in the background. We stop the script when the file compression and video conversion are complete. This is a very taxing script for the CPU, Memory, and Storage subsystem. We also found it to be a good indicator of system stability during our overclocking testing.
The performance difference basically mirrors our PCMark 2005 tests with the ASUS P965 boards scoring about 3% better overall in our multitasking test. We also see our Biostar 965PT board nipping on the heels of the ASUS boards and showing the results in PCMark 2005 were repeatable in this multitasking test. Both Gigabyte boards finish last which is surprising given their strength in our other benchmarks. As with our PCMark 2005 test both Gigabyte boards had issues with the virus scanning tests. We noticed in this test that our AVG anti-virus scan would stutter severely at various times during the tests.
PCMark 2005, together with two benchmarks that use rendering to test system performance - Cinebench 9.5 and POV-Ray 3.6 - has replaced Winstones for testing general performance. The Cinebench 9.5 and POV-RAY 3.6 benchmarks both heavily stress the CPU subsystem while performing graphics modeling and rendering. We utilize the standard benchmark demos in each program along with their default settings. Cinebench 9.5 features two different benchmarks with one test utilizing a single core and the second test using the power of multiple cores to render the benchmark image. We utilize the dual core test for our results.
We see our collection of Biostar and Gigabyte boards taking top honors in these benchmarks although all of the scores are extremely close. We continue to see a pattern where the P965 boards at stock speeds are scoring slightly better than our 975X and NVIDIA 570SLI offerings.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
23 Comments
View All Comments
Zak - Tuesday, November 14, 2006 - link
Yeah, WTF with the software design? Did they hire someone fired from FisherPrice or what? It's ugly and dysfunctional, even Asus AI Booster isn't THIS ugly.<Z>
mindless1 - Monday, November 13, 2006 - link
Regarding the article comment about the floppy connector,"We would just as well have this connector disappear at this time."
you might want to clarify who "we" is, since there are plenty of people who want a floppy connector even if they don't have a constant use for a floppy drive.
Remember that one person's use of a system does not equal entire world. Many legacy apps and even some emergency bios recovery routines require a floppy drive. If this were a reduced form factor board, it stands to reason that more features requiring connectors need to be left out, but to give up functionality on a whim is hardly useful, it's not as though you would have to grand replacement feature on that bottom edge, cubic inch of space otherwise.
Larso - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link
Oh my, do those motherboard monitoring/tuning applications look ugly... Ugly as in grotesque swollen blobs rather than functional design.A shame, I really liked the biostar board until the accompanying software utility appeared before for my eyes, aww... The gigabyte software is not pretty either... Can you switch the GUI to something less graphical and more standard windows widgets -like?
Do all software accompanying motherboards look like this??
Avalon - Saturday, November 11, 2006 - link
You mean you actually use software to overclock? Do it the manly way and use the BIOS.Larso - Saturday, November 11, 2006 - link
Its not about overclocking, the problem is if the motherboard software has some specific monitoring/adjusting features not available in freeware monitoring applications. Then you would have to use that monstrous software if you want the feature.Another problem is quality impression of the product as a whole. That software's user interface simply turns me off. Why don't they make the interface look like PRO tools, instead of plastic hell!
bullfrawg - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link
I think it's great that, as mentioned in the first article, you are checking out the manufacturer's tech support by pretending to be regular joes rather than review sites. So I want to express interest in seeing more detail about how tech support treats you. ASUS seems to have gotten a bad reputation lately for tech support -- is this justified in your experience? I see that you say Gigabyte has been good so far. Thanks!Staples - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link
The 965 performs very well no matter what board it is on. I will be waiting till you get a 650i Ultra board to review. I am holding out on a Core Duo and my next purchase will be between these two chipsets.Kensei - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link
Nice old school reference back to the double-mint twins. You definitely dated yourself with that one Gary.Kensei
Hikari - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link
Not really, I saw a double mint advertisement on TV with twins the other day...Kensei - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link
Really! I didn't know they had done a remake of that commercial.Ken