Foxconn MARS: God of War Performance?
by Gary Key on September 21, 2007 12:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Test Setup
Test conditions are maintained the same, as much as possible, over the platforms tested. Our game tests are run at settings of 1280x1024 HQ to ensure our MSI HD 2900XT is not the bottleneck during testing. All results are reported in our charts and color-coded for easier identification of results.
We selected the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 as our processor of choice since it represents one of the better price to performance values in the midrange processor market and is the CPU we will concentrate on in future reviews. We are utilizing Microsoft Vista Home Premium 32-bit as our operating system along with a 4GB memory configuration. Even though Vista 32-bit cannot take advantage of the entire 4GB of memory address space (3.326GB), we found the additional 1.278GB of memory available provides improved performance during multitasking events and gaming. We would not recommend anything less than 2GB with Vista Home Premium. Additional testing was completed with 2x2GB and 4x2GB modules and we will show results once the board is released.
We utilize new drive images on each board in order to minimize any potential driver conflicts. Our 3DMark results are generated utilizing the standard benchmark resolution for each program. We run each benchmark five times, throw out the two low and high scores, and report the remaining score. All results at stock speeds for this article are with memory timings at 4-4-4-12 (DDR2-1066). Where possible, memory sub-timings are set exactly the same to ensure consistency between the boards.
Our choice of software applications to test is based on programs that enjoy widespread usage and produce repeatable and consistent results during testing. Microsoft Vista has thrown a monkey wrench into testing as the aggressive nature of the operating system to constantly optimize application loading and execution presents some interesting obstacles. This along with what we still see as a lack of driver maturity continue to present problems with benchmarking. Our normal process is to change our power settings to performance, delete the contents of the Prefetch folder, and then reboot after each benchmark run. This results in better consistency over the course of benchmark testing. All applications are run with administer privileges.
Foxconn MARS P35 Testbed | |
Processor | Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 Quad 2.4GHz, 2x4MB Unified Cache, 9x Multiplier, 1066FSB |
CPU Voltage | 1.200V Stock |
Cooling | Thermalright 120 Extreme |
Power Supply | OCZ 1000W |
Memory | Corsair Twin2x2048-10000C5DF |
Memory Settings | 4-4-4-12 (DDR2-1066) |
Video Cards | MSI HD X2900 XT 512MB |
Video Drivers | ATI Catalyst 7.9 |
Hard Drive | Western Digital 7200RPM 750GB SATA 3/Gbps 16MB Buffer |
Optical Drives | Plextor PX-B900A, Toshiba SD-H802A |
Case | Cooler Master Stacker 830 Evo |
BIOS | P.03 |
Operating System | Windows Vista Home Premium 32-bit |
. |
Test conditions are maintained the same, as much as possible, over the platforms tested. Our game tests are run at settings of 1280x1024 HQ to ensure our MSI HD 2900XT is not the bottleneck during testing. All results are reported in our charts and color-coded for easier identification of results.
We selected the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 as our processor of choice since it represents one of the better price to performance values in the midrange processor market and is the CPU we will concentrate on in future reviews. We are utilizing Microsoft Vista Home Premium 32-bit as our operating system along with a 4GB memory configuration. Even though Vista 32-bit cannot take advantage of the entire 4GB of memory address space (3.326GB), we found the additional 1.278GB of memory available provides improved performance during multitasking events and gaming. We would not recommend anything less than 2GB with Vista Home Premium. Additional testing was completed with 2x2GB and 4x2GB modules and we will show results once the board is released.
We utilize new drive images on each board in order to minimize any potential driver conflicts. Our 3DMark results are generated utilizing the standard benchmark resolution for each program. We run each benchmark five times, throw out the two low and high scores, and report the remaining score. All results at stock speeds for this article are with memory timings at 4-4-4-12 (DDR2-1066). Where possible, memory sub-timings are set exactly the same to ensure consistency between the boards.
Our choice of software applications to test is based on programs that enjoy widespread usage and produce repeatable and consistent results during testing. Microsoft Vista has thrown a monkey wrench into testing as the aggressive nature of the operating system to constantly optimize application loading and execution presents some interesting obstacles. This along with what we still see as a lack of driver maturity continue to present problems with benchmarking. Our normal process is to change our power settings to performance, delete the contents of the Prefetch folder, and then reboot after each benchmark run. This results in better consistency over the course of benchmark testing. All applications are run with administer privileges.
17 Comments
View All Comments
Griswold - Sunday, September 23, 2007 - link
I see they also implemented the Northbridge<->PWM section cooling with heatpipes. Recipe for hot PWM with an Overclocked 4 core CPUHumbug. The PWMs with an overclocked quad will be hotter than a P35 NB - and they also can take alot more heat than a NB. Dont make issues up where there are none.
kmmatney - Saturday, September 22, 2007 - link
it seems like it would be better just to remove the covers over chipset heatsinks - don't they just reduce airflow? The coolpipe logo piece should just be taken off altogether.wolfman3k5 - Saturday, September 22, 2007 - link
Nice review, thanks allot! I want to buy one of these, where can I find this board?JarredWalton - Saturday, September 22, 2007 - link
Not out at retail quite yet - early next month I believe.cmdrdredd - Saturday, September 22, 2007 - link
Good board from the review, but it's a little late. Those who were looking to adopt P35 already have one of the other boards, everyone else wants to see X38. I suppose it would depend on the price of this board vs others once it hits actual retail channels.Griswold - Sunday, September 23, 2007 - link
Your world must be really small.strikeback03 - Monday, September 24, 2007 - link
Then again, didn't Gary Key say in the comments on the ASUS X38 board that he expects X38 to take over this market segment once initial hysteria wears off; as performance should be better than P35 for the same money. Then P35 would primarily work in the midrange.