Aliens vs. Predator Benchmark

Aliens vs. Predator is a DirectX 11 science fiction first-person shooter video game, developed by Rebellion Developments.  Available as a standalone benchmark, on default settings the benchmark uses 1920x1080 with high AF settings.  Results are reported as the average frame rate across 4 runs.

AVP - One 5850

AVP - Two 5850

AVP - One 580

AVP - Two 580

The X79 Extreme9 performs well in AVP, coming either top or near top for the benchmark.

Dirt 3

Dirt 3 is a rallying video game and the third in the Dirt series of the Colin McRae Rally series, developed and published by Codemasters.  Using the in game benchmark, Dirt 3 is run at 1920x1080 with full graphical settings.  Results are reported as the average frame rate across 4 runs.

Dirt 3 - One 5850

Dirt 3 - Two 5850

Dirt 3 - One 580

Dirt 3 - Two 580

While a good showing for Dirt3 on AMD, the X79 Extreme9 seems to fall when using NVIDIA compared to other boards.

Metro2033

Metro 2033 is a challenging DX11 benchmark that challenges every system that tries to run it at any high-end settings.  Developed by 4A Games and released in March 2010, we use the inbuilt DirectX 11 Frontline benchmark to test the hardware at 1920x1080 with full graphical settings.  Results are given as the average frame rate from 10 runs.

Metro2033 - One 5850

Metro2033 - Two 5850

Metro2033 - One 580

Metro2033 - Two 580

The X79 Extreme9 is never far off the top in Metro2033 compared to other X79 - using one 5850 and the board is only 0.6 FPS below the best board.

Computation Benchmarks Final Words
Comments Locked

14 Comments

View All Comments

  • Hauk - Tuesday, January 24, 2012 - link

    I remember jumping to X58 when I saw that a reasonably priced cpu (i7 920) which would OC like crazy came available. Not so much with X79, still waiting for i7 3820, all parts on hand, including an ASRock Extreme 7 ($259). It's not such a bad platform when cheap mobo's, cpus, and DDR3 are available. What about it Intel?? Stupid move IMO not getting 3820 to market sooner. X79 could have garnered more steam than it has..
  • landerf - Tuesday, January 24, 2012 - link

    For the record Creative's Core3D doesn't offload openal, in case anyone was expecting it too.
  • BPB - Tuesday, January 24, 2012 - link

    Does this board support SRT? If so I would actually consider spending the money on it.
  • Blibbax - Tuesday, January 24, 2012 - link

    "The X79 Extreme9 comes in around +50% more than those boards ($360 vs. ~$240), meaning I would expect 50% more when it came to the Extreme9."

    It never works like this. Is a Ferrari 5000% better than a Ford? What about 3960x vs. 3930k?

    If you want maximum performance per price, there's no way you'd be looking at SB-E anyway.
  • purefun1965 - Wednesday, January 25, 2012 - link

    I feel its overpriced. I would like it more if it was $300.00
  • Stas - Wednesday, January 25, 2012 - link

    ClrCMOS button is nice. That's about it.
  • Stas - Wednesday, January 25, 2012 - link

    Also, no 24-phase power? O.o
  • AlexIsAlex - Wednesday, January 25, 2012 - link

    I mentioned this in the last motherboard review, but as I didn't get an answer either way, I'll ask again just in case:

    What would be nice, in motherboard reviews, would be a measure of the cold boot (POST) time. This is something that different bioses can be differentiated on, and UFEI offers the potential for very fast boots if manufacturers take advantage of it properly.

    Would it be possible to report, for comparison, the time between the power button being pressed and the installed bootloader starting? I was thinking it might be easiest to measure this by having no OS on the boot media and measuring the time to the "please insert boot media" message, but I'm sure you can think of other ways of doing it.

    Another commenter also requested that this be done for both stock and overclocked settings, as he found boot times to be much slower with overclocked settings on his motherboard.
  • bji - Wednesday, January 25, 2012 - link

    I would absolutely love to see these figures also. It is a major annoyance to me that my ASUS motherboard takes a full 7 - 8 seconds to even show the POST screen, and a further 1 - 2 seconds after that to get to my bootloader. I would personally highly value a greatly reduced POST time and would like to have this information in motherboard reviews. Having these values measured, evaluated, and compared is the only way that motherboard and BIOS makers will have any incentive to improve.
  • javier_machuk - Sunday, January 29, 2012 - link

    I'm on the same boat! my asus z68 board takes longer to post than to load windows with a intel 510 ssd!
    It would be interesting to compare this values between various manufacturers.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now