ABIT NI8 SLI: Overclocking

ABIT NI8 SLI Overclocking Testbed
Processor: Intel P4 D840 EE 3.2 Ghz
CPU Voltage: 1.41V (default 1.385V)
Cooling: Gigabyte 3D Cooler Ultra GT
Power Supply: PC Power and Cooling Turbo-Cool 510 SLI
Memory: 2x Corsair CM2X512A - 5400UL v 1.2
Hard Drive: Western Digital 36GB Raptor 10,000RPM
Maximum OC:
(Standard Ratio)
220x16 (4x HT)
3520MHz (+9.4%)
Maximum FSB:
(Lower Ratio)
220 x 14 (4x HT)
(2 DIMMs in DC mode @ 667Mhz 3-2-2-8 1T)
(+9.4% Bus Overclock)

This was a very disappointing showing for the NI8 in the overclocking department. This CPU has proven to run at 3700-3800 MHz on air cooling while utilized on other similar Intel mainboards, so the overclocking roadblock is definitely not the CPU. My background is deep in overclocking experience over the years, including extensive water and phase-change cooling experience. All the stops were pulled out to get this particular setup higher, including raising VCore from 1.41V to its limit, dropping the LDT multiplier to 1 from 4, dropping the memory all the way down to 400 MHz, and lowering the multiplier to its minimum of 14. The system would muster a boot at 225 MHz FSB, but then freeze in Windows. 220 MHz FSB is rock-solid stable and the most that could be attained.

Raising the northbridge voltage has been key on other similar C19 northbridge based boards, but ABIT has left that option out and it most probably was a smart move. As mentioned before, its preset 1.4V combined with the Silent OTES cooling solution gets incredibly hot; more voltage invariably would overwhelm the supplied cooling beyond its capacity. My feeling is even with substantially better CPU cooling such as water or phase change, the limit here is the board itself and not the CPU. Upgrading the NB cooling could potentially help, but without the BIOS option to increase NB voltage we would only get halfway there.

ABIT NI8 SLI: Feature Set (Cont'd) ABIT NI8 SLI: Memory Stress Testing
Comments Locked

19 Comments

View All Comments

  • jojo4u - Friday, October 7, 2005 - link

    The graphs give a nice overview, good work.

    Please consider to include the information what AF level was used into the graphs. This is something all recent reviews here have have been lacking.

    About the image quality: The shimmering was greatly reduced with the fixed driver (78.03). So it's down to NV40 level now. But 3dCenter.de[1] and Computerbase.de conclude that only enabling "high quality" in the Forceware brings comparable image quality to "A.I. low". Perhaps you find the time to explore this issue in the image quality tests.

    [1] http://www.3dcenter.de/artikel/g70_flimmern/index_...">http://www.3dcenter.de/artikel/g70_flimmern/index_...
    This article is about the unfixed quality. But to judge the G70 today, have a look at the 6800U videos.
    http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=1549&am...">http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=1549&am...
    This article shows the performance hit of enabling "high quality"
  • jojo4u - Friday, October 7, 2005 - link

    oops wrong forum
  • Avalon - Friday, October 7, 2005 - link

    Thanks for the clarification Wesley, and welcome aboard Randi!
  • Wesley Fink - Friday, October 7, 2005 - link

    Please welcome Randi Sica as our newest reviewer at AnandTech. Randi is a friend who is well known in the Extreme Overclocking community as Mr. Icee. That gives Randi a keen eye when looking at what's right and wrong with a motherboard from an Extreme Overclocker's perspective.

    We think you will also find Randi's review perspective and approach a little different. Those who have been screaming for overclocked benchmarks in board reviews will find them in Randi's reviews.

    This is Randi's first review at AnandTech, so please make him feel welcomed.
  • yacoub - Friday, October 7, 2005 - link

    PASSIVELY COOLED! That's soooo appealing. I wish board makers could get the northbridges cool enough on the AMD chipset to make more passively cooled boards. I hate having another fan in the case, especially a tiny one running at high revs making a racket. It's bad enough most GPUs suffer from that, we don't need another one on the mobo. :(
  • DigitalFreak - Friday, October 7, 2005 - link

    Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I don't think the audio is on the PCI-E bus. The codec hangs directly off the southbridge, and isn't on any bus. If you look at the slot the audio card goes in, it's actually a PCI-E 1x connector turned backwards. I'm assuming that they use that particular connector because it's cheaper than designing something custom. Still, not a bad job on the CPU utilization.

    BTW, the chip is an ALC850, not ACL850 as mentioned on page 3.
  • Wesley Fink - Friday, October 7, 2005 - link

    Thanks for pointing this out. The references to the audio connector have been corrected to "dedicated audio connector" which it is unless we hear otherwise from Abit. We have seen the separate dedicated audio card can significantly reduce CPU overhead, and Abit seems to have done well with this idea on this board.
  • Live - Friday, October 7, 2005 - link

    Enough said...
  • Avalon - Friday, October 7, 2005 - link

    quote:

    The superior Workstation performance demonstrated here involves two parts: the ABIT NI8 SLI coupled to the D840 EE Dual core P4. The other boards compared here feature a standard single core solution


    Wait, what? You are comparing a dual core HT enabled system with several other Intel systems using only a single core? How is this apples to apples? This makes all of the benchmarks you did worthless.
  • Wesley Fink - Friday, October 7, 2005 - link

    ALL tests used the exact same CPU except the Workstation test results. That means general performance, encoding, DX9, and DX8 gaming were tested on all reported platforms with the Pentium D 840EE.

    The Workstation Tests were included because they were an interesting picture of a 3.6GHz single core being soundly outperformed by a 3.2GHz dual-core Pentium D. The workstation tests were meant to be an illustration, not a direct comparison.

    The 3.46EE was used in some past memory tests to achieve high memory bus speeds, and the reference was only made in examing overclocked memory FSB speed records - not comparative performance.

    We will make this clearer in the review, but all of the benchmarks except Worksation are definitely apples to apples tests - even down to HT being enabled in all tests.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now