Intel Core Duo: AOpen i975Xa-YDG to the Rescue
by Gary Key on May 4, 2006 8:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
FSB Overclocking Results
| Front Side Bus Overclocking Testbed | |
| Processor: | Intel Core Duo T2400 -1.83GHz |
| CPU Voltage: | 1.400v (1.250V default) |
| Memory Settings: | 4-4-4-15 at 667MHz |
| Memory Voltage: | 2.15v |
| NB Voltage: | 1.575V |
| PCI-E Voltage: | 1.525V |
| Cooling: | AOpen Supplied Cooler |
| Power Supply: | FPS FX700-GLN |
| Maximum CPU OverClock: | 255fsb x 11 (2805MHz) +54% |
| Maximum FSB OverClock: | 255fsb x 11 (2805MHz) +54% |
 |
| Click to enlarge |
This board is a very good overclocker although it does have a couple of quirks. The BIOS allows you to overclock the front side bus by 1MHz increments but you are limited at both the minimum and maximum levels by a set of jumpers. If the JP4 and JP5 jumpers are enabled the board defaults to a 166MHz minimum and a 199MHz maximum. If these jumpers are disabled the board defaults to a 200MHz minimum and a 320MHz maximum.
The Core Duo processor does not allow a change to the CPU multiplier so keep this in mind when deciding what CPU to purchase. We were able to take our retail CPU to a setting of 11x262 before we hit a ceiling with either the board or the CPU utilizing the stock cooling. We are reporting our maximum numbers at 11x255, not because of the board or CPU not being stable at 11x262, but due to our comparative Opteron 175 only reaching this level and remaining stable. This board series has reached the 274FSB level based upon user experiences, so we either reached the limit of our CPU or possibly our board does not overclock quite as well as retail samples.
Considering the maximum official Core Duo CPU is currently running at 2.16 GHz, an overclock to 2.882 GHz (using the relatively inexpensive T2400 CPU) is nothing to complain about! We might even add that our retail CPU stayed in the 36c to 39c range under load at the overclocked settings with the AOpen supplied heatsink/fan. Additional testing with a watercooling unit brought our temperatures down to the 26c range under full load as we reached a 267FSB level (required 1.675V on the Nortbridge, 5-5-5-15 memory timings) before the board would not post.
Memory Stress Testing
Memory stress tests look at the ability of the AOpen i975xa-YDG to operate at the officially supported memory frequencies of 667MHz DDR2 at the best performing memory timings the Corsair CM2X1024-6400PRO revision 1.4 will support.
| AOpen i975Xa- YDG Stable DDR2-667 Timings - 2 DIMMs (2/4 slots populated - 1 Dual-Channel Bank) |
|
| Clock Speed: | 166MHz (667FSB) |
| Timing Mode: | 667MHz - Default |
| CAS Latency: | 3 |
| RAS to CAS Delay: | 3 |
| RAS Precharge: | 3 |
| RAS Cycle Time: | 8 |
| Voltage: | 1.9V |
The AOpen board was very stable with two (1GB) DDR2 modules in Dual-Channel mode at the settings of 3-3-3-8 at 1.9V. The board would set tRAS to 12 if the memory selection was left on auto. We did not notice any issues throughout our testing with a tRAS setting of 8 at the stock 11x166 setting. We will now install our Corsair modules into all four available memory slots, which results in more strenuous requirements on the memory subsystem than testing just two DDR2 modules.
| AOpen i975Xa- YDG Stable DDR2-667 Timings - 4 DIMMs (4/4 slots populated - 2 Dual-Channel Banks) |
|
| Clock Speed: | 166MHz (667FSB) |
| Timing Mode: | 667MHz - Default |
| CAS Latency: | 3 |
| RAS to CAS Delay: | 3 |
| RAS Precharge: | 3 |
| RAS Cycle Time: | 12 |
| Voltage: | 1.95V |
The AOpen was completely stable with four (1GB) DDR2 modules in Dual-Channel operation at the settings of 3-3-3-12. Note that tRAS had to be changed from 8 to 12 along with a slight memory increase to 1.95V. These are excellent results as the board performed superbly throughout our memory testing regimen that included eight to twenty four hour runs of MemTest86 and Prime95 along with numerous iterations of SuperPI set at 32M. This board along with the Intel 975X core logic is about as solid as it gets.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
81 Comments
View All Comments
Per Hansson - Wednesday, May 17, 2006 - link
Hi Gary, just wanted to drop in and give you a kudos on this very nice review!It also makes me smile to finally see Intel catching up with AMD, this can only be good news for the customer...
And a small heads up, there are a few Intel Core Duo Engineering sample CPU's on sale at eBay, "hint hint engineering sample=multipler unlocked"
And also a big thanks for finally posting those capacitor shots and mentioning them, keep up the good work!
Also I think Aopen deserves recognition for designing a mainboard with so high-quality components, Rubycon=Way to go!!!
goinginstyle - Friday, May 19, 2006 - link
Agreed....
vailr - Thursday, May 4, 2006 - link
Updated driver:(from: http://www.station-drivers.com/page/intechip.htm)">http://www.station-drivers.com/page/intechip.htm)
Intel Chipset software Installation Utility
Version 7.3.1.1013 - Windows 2000/XP 32/64bits/2003Server Multi Langues & officiel
ftp://aiedownload.intel.com/df-support/10392/eng/i...">ftp://aiedownload.intel.com/df-support/10392/eng/i...
Version 8.0.0.1005 Alpha
Windows 2000/XP 32/64bits/2003Server Multi Langues & non officiel
http://www.station-drivers.com/telechargement/inte...">http://www.station-drivers.com/telechargement/inte... Alpha.exe
Gary Key - Thursday, May 4, 2006 - link
Thank you for posting these links. :) We have a policy of utilizing the latest driver sets on a supplier's website at the time our testing starts, in this case the Intel general download page is still posting the 7.2.2.1006 driver set. However, I am using the 7.3.1 driver set on our retail board sample tonight. ;-)irev210 - Sunday, May 7, 2006 - link
Hello Gary,Sorta funny how that other fellow has absolutely no idea what he is talking about.
I just wanted to touch upon something that I didnt see get much attention.
You should have mentioned in your article about how efficient the core architecture is, and how well it scales with increased frequency. The chip turns into a total monster once you get past 3ghz, and continues to perform better and better as you increase the speed. The fastest I could get on air was around 3.1ghz. I wouldnt be afraid to crank the volts to the 1.5 max on the aopen board... with a different cooler, you should hit some nice speeds. Try swapping out for a zalman 9500, or a big typhoon.
The shortfalls, are as you mentioned the southbridge lacking raid, and the poor bios options. Vcore should let us up to 1.65-1.7, while Vdimm should let us do atleast 2.3.
While this may not satisfy the most serious enthusiast, this board does fill a nice niche. The price is pretty high, but core duo CPU's can be had on the cheap, which makes up for it. For someone that is worried about their electric bill, and wants performance and performance per watt, this is a great alternative.
For others who must have the fastest. This just makes them drool. This is the low end of the core architecture. Merom and Conroe to follow... we shall be stunned.
Consdering Meroms being tested now at 3.0Ghz are faster than 3.2Ghz Yonah's... AND YOU WILL SEE Conroe EE at 3.33 w/ a 1333fsb doing 4ghz w/ 1500mhz FSB :)
For those that dont get it yet... AMD will need a AM2 processor running at about oh 4.8Ghz to beat a 4Ghz clocked conroe :)
Good things to come. I take no sides, im just excited about new stuff :)
Marlowe - Thursday, May 4, 2006 - link
How come a ~1 % cpu usage translates into a massiv 20 fps drop in BF2? Looks like EA have a deal with Creative :(A lot of world records have been beaten with this mobo already over here at XS :)
coolaler even got SLI enabled on it ;) also running a merom in it ;)
Your 266 FSB is very good and about normal for aircooling. Give it some cold and it will go further ;)
Frumious1 - Thursday, May 4, 2006 - link
[font color="#000000] (Damn white text. Nice comment engine AnandTech.... Need a new programmer?)Because RightMark is a theoretical test and not actually a real game or audio application. Also, look at the 3D/EAX scores - it's more than 1% CPU usage, but still less than 20% or whatever.
Gary Key - Thursday, May 4, 2006 - link
It has to do with the Realtek driver load and Creatives to some extent being split between the cores during the RightMark testing. I noted in the text that although the cpu utilization is extremely low in our Rightmark results due to the load balancing that the actual game results (percentage differences) were basically the same as our single core scores. The drop in BF2 is due to the audio algorithms being generated by the CPU rather in hardware as on the X-FI card. Our audio settings in BF2 are set to hardware, medium quality, EAX enabled, the high quality setting extracts another 6FPS but we generally have not noticed an increase in audio quality. This is one penalty you pay for on-board audio in a CPU limited game although Serious Sam II is the one exception for either solution.
We are hoping to receive a T2700 chip from Intel shortly and will "chill" it to see what results come from it. :) Yes, we had SLI working on the board also, but that is a topic that will be buried with Jimmy Hoffa at this time. ;-)
NT78stonewobble - Friday, May 5, 2006 - link
Intriguing last 2 sentences.The comments section has some really good info alot of the time :).
And kudos for bringing into the review something about the penalty for using onboard audio versus dedicated hardware.
You're not by any chance planning on writing something about audio quality some-time? Not that im an audiophile or the like, just curious.
Gary Key - Friday, May 5, 2006 - link
We will expand our audio section in the next update to our motherboard review section. We are looking at several variations of the review process as we enter a very busy time of the year with AM2, Conroe, and others all launching over the next 90 days. :)