Intel D875PBZ - Page 8

..:: Benchmarks ::..

Well, now it is time to take a look at the performance of the Intel i875P Canterwood chipset, and the D875PBZ “Bonanza” motherboard. For our tests, we utilized a 2.66GHz 533FSB Pentium 4 without Hyper-Threading which was overclocked to 3.00GHz at 800MHz FSB on a Gigabyte GA-8PE800. We used this chip to test the performance of an i845PE motherboard at 800MHz FSB. For our Canterwood testing, we used a 3.00GHz 800MHz FSB Pentium 4 with Hyper-Threading on an Intel D875PBZ. Each system was tested immediately after a fresh system reformat with the latest system drivers installed. For both systems, all onboard features were disabled during the benchmarking process, and identical test hardware such as graphics card and RAM were used in order to achieve the best results. This will give us a fairly accurate “apples to apples” performance difference between the two chipsets with processors running at identical internal clock speeds and system bus speeds. It is important that I note neither system had Hyper-Threading enabled (with exception to the SuperPI benchmark) for the most accurate chipset comparison results. In the graphs, we have shown the performance of the i875P motherboard with both single channel and dual channel DDR 400, labeled as “SC 400" and “DC 400” in the graphs.

..:: SiSoft SANDRA ::..

To start things off, let’s take a look at the SANDRA results we achieved. As you can see, even with Hyper-Threading Technology disabled on both processors, the i875P chipset is able to achieve a pretty substantial gain over the i845PE chipset. With Hyper-Threading Technology enabled on the D875PBZ, we can see that the performance gain is even larger. The story is a little different when it comes to the multimedia results. Here we can see that, when Hyper-Threading is disabled, the two chipsets put up results in the same ballpark but the i875P is able to surpass the i845PE’s performance nevertheless. When Hyper-Threading is enabled, there is clearly a much larger gain in performance over the i845PE chipset sporting the non-HT processor. The graph that most of you will be interested in is up next, that being the memory scores. In this test, we can see that the i845PE chipset actually appears to hold a minute lead over the i875P in single channel DDR333 performance, but beyond that the i875P is king. When the i875P is running in dual channel DDR400, the board puts up some incredible memory scores topping out at 4816 / 4774! Clearly, the i875P chipset is far superior to the i845PE when it comes to memory performance.

..:: SuperPI ::..

In the SuperPI tests, we run the program seven times at various intervals between 128,000 digits and 8 million digits. The numbers in the graph above show the time in seconds that it took the system to calculate pi to the set number of digits. For this benchmark, I did choose to enable HT on the i875P system to show the performance gain of i875P & HT over i845PE. Here, we can clearly see that the i875P chipset is king. The chipsets put up numbers that are very close in the lower level calculations, however when we get to the higher level calculations, specifically the eight million digit mark, we can not only see the performance gain of dual channel over single channel, but we can also see the power of the i875P chipset over the i845PE. The i875P running with dual channel DDR400 completes the calculation 59 seconds faster than the i845PE GA-8PE800. It also bests the single channel DDR400 result by 19 seconds, pulling off a 3.6% lead.

..:: Specviewperf 7.0 ::..

So far, the i875P chipset has put up some impressive numbers, but the question is whether or not it can keep it up. In the SPECviewperf 7.0 benchmarks we can see that, as expected, the i875P chipset comes out on top in both single and dual channel memory modes. In the UGS01 benchmark, the i875P chipset holds a performance gain of 1.4% for single channel, and 7.6% for dual channel. In the Proe benchmark, the i875P holds a lead of 2.4% and 5.3%, while the Light05 benchmark shows a performance gain of 2.9% and 8.6%. The DX07 benchmark once again shows the i875P chipset coming out on top by 2.9% and 7.7%, while in the DRV08 benchmark, we see gains of 4.8% and 8.9%, and lastly, we see gains of 1.3% and 3.1%. As we can see, when the i875P chipset is running in dual channel DDR400, there is a nice performance gain over the i845PE chipset.

..:: Cinebench 2000 ::..

The Cinebench 2000 tests once again show the i875P chipset coming out as the superior in each of the three benchmarks. In the Cinema4D benchmark, the i875P chipset holds a lead of 1.2% in single channel mode, and 3.8% in dual channel mode. In the OpenGL benchmarks, the i875P chipset holds a 1.3% lead for single channel performance, and a 4.5% lead for dual channel performance. Lastly, in the Raytracing benchmark, the single channel setup holds a lead of .4% while the dual channel setup holds a lead of 1.0%.

..:: FutureMark 3DMark2001SE ::..

FutureMark’s 3DMark2001 SE shows us something we have seen throughout our testing so far, the i875P chipset comes out as the winner. In these tests, and all those following, we ran the benchmarks in 640 x 480 resolutions in order to avoid the graphics card bottleneck that we had been experiencing in high resolutions. In a true testament to the power of the i875P chipset, we began to see a graphics bottle neck just above 800 x 600! Time to get a new graphics card, phew! Well, for 16-bit performance, the i875P chipset in single channel mode holds a lead of 2.1%, while in dual channel mode it manages a lead of 6.1%. In the 32-bit benchmarks, we see similar results with the i875P coming out on top by 1.9% and 4.3% respectively.

..:: Quake III Arena ::..

Well, surprise surprise, once again we see the i875P chipset putting up some nice numbers when placed against the i845PE chipset. In the 16-bit color benchmarks, we are seeing a performance gain over the i845PE chipset in single channel mode of 3.4%, while when the i875P chipset is running in dual channel mode it pulls of a lead of roughly 9.1%! In the 32-bit color benchmarks, we see that the i875P chipset holds a lead of 3.7% for single channel memory performance and roughly 9.6%! We are seeing larger performance gains in 32-bit color for Quake III Arena than we are the 16-bit color benchmarks.

..:: Unreal Tournament 2003 ::..

Last up for today we have yet another fairly new benchmark for our motherboard reviews, Unreal Tournament 2003. We are using the built-in benchmarking utility with custom .ini files to make sure all settings are at high quality to allow for optimal benchmarking results for comparison. Each of the UT2003 benchmarks once again shows the i875P chipset coming out on top. In these benchmarks, we are seeing a performance gain in single channel mode of roughly 2.2% in the Flyby and 2.4% for the BotMatch tests. The performance gain achieved by the i875P chipset running in dual channel mode comes out to be roughly 6.3% for the Flyby test, and 6.0% for the BotMatch test.

I have to say, the i875P chipset from Intel has to be one of the more impressive chipsets that I have had the pleasure of working with in the past year of reviewing motherboards. The performance gains that it achieves over the i845PE chipset in single channel mode are decent at best, but the results we are seeing in dual channel mode are much more impressive. We are seeing roughly around 7.0% and up performance gains in nearly all of the benchmarks for dual channel DDR400 over the i845PE’s single channel DDR400. If those numbers aren’t impressive enough for you, don’t forget that we are using a 2.66GHz 533MHz FSB P4, overclocked to 800MHz FSB. Clearly, the performance gains we would see between a 3.06GHz 533MHz FSB Pentium 4, and a 3.00GHz 800MHz FSB Pentium 4 would be even larger than what we have seen today. Also, we cannot forget that for our tests we did not enable HT on the i875P system, which in itself is designed for HT which would further add to the performance gain of the i875P chipset. This could be the chipset to have when the boards begin to hit the market in mass shortly.