Gigabyte X48T DQ6 Living Review - Page 21

Ace-a-Rue · #**201** 09-05-2008, 17:19

you should see the card...it is freaking long...it overhangs the backside of the board by about an inch...it will be a tight fit once i put in my case....might need a case upgrade

Ace-a-Rue · #**202** 09-05-2008, 17:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by supershanks

E8500: 4,420 8.5x520@3.33D 1,732 7,7,7,14

Click to Enlarge

Code:

GIGABYTE GA X48T DQ6 Clock Settings
MB Intelligent Tweaker (MIT)
Robust Graphics Booster...........: Turbo
CPU Clock Ratio...................: 8.5
CPU Frequency.....................: 4,420Mhz
CPU Host Clock Control............: Enabled
CPU Host Frequency(Mhz)...........: 520
PCI Express Frequency (Mhz).......: 104
C.I.A.2...........................: Disabled
Performance Enhance...............: Turbo
System Memory Multiplier (SPD)....: 3.33D
Memory Frequency(Mhz).............: 1,733Mhz
DRAM Timing Selectable ...........: Manual
Standard Timing Control
CAS Latency Time (tCL)............: 7
DRAM RAS# to CAS#  (tRCD).........: 7
DRAM RAS# Precharge (tRP).........: 7
Precharge Delay (tRAS)............: 14
Advanced Timing Control
ACT to ACT Delay(tRRD)............: 5
Rank Write to READ Delay (tWTR)...: 4
Write To Precharge Delay (tWR)....: 9
Refresh to ACT Delay (tRFC).......: 50
Read To Precharge Delay (tRTP)....: 4
Static tREAD Value (tRD)..........: 7
Static tREAD Phase Adj............: Auto
Command Rate (CMD)................: 1N
Clock Driving and Skew Control
CPU/PCIEX Clock Driving Control...: 800mv
CPU Clock Skew Control............: Normal
(G)MCH Clock Skew Control.........: Normal
System Voltage Control ()=Base Voltage):  Manual
DDR3 OverVoltage Control...(1.50v): +0.35v
PCI-E OverVoltage Control.,(1.50v): +0.10v
FSB OverVoltage Control....(1.10v): +0.10v
(G)MCH OverVoltage Control,(1.45v): +0.400v
CPU GTLREF1 Voltage*.......(67%)..: -3%
CPU GTLREF2 Voltage*.......(61%)..: -3%
Loadline Calibration..............: Auto
CPU Voltage Control...............: 1.450v
Normal CPU Vcore..................: 1.1125v
Note: * Hidden Features Press [CTRL] + [F1] from main Menu to Access
Advanced Bios Features
Limit CPUID Max to 3..............: Disabled
No-Execute Memory Protect.........: Disabled
CPU Enhanced Halt(CIE)............: Disabled
CPU Thermal Monitor 2.............: Enabled
CPU EIST Function.................: Disabled
Virtuaalization Technology........:  Disabled

EXCELLENT super-pi scores!

the one thing i hate about gigabyte's bios is the CPU GTLREF section...the settings are riduculous for a new person to understand...i love Abit's approach to it!!...you like to strangle the damn bios engineering for coming up with that approach!...BAH!

supershanks · #**203** 09-05-2008, 18:49

Quote:

you should see the card...it is freaking long...it overhangs the backside of the board by about an inch...it will be a tight fit once i put in my case....might need a case upgrade

Nice to see you doing your bit to stop the economic slowdown, your wife must be proud

They seem to be getting bigger , your right, not sure if that means more value for money

Quote:

EXCELLENT super-pi scores!

Yep was quite pleased with the Wprime results. Had to slacken memory sub timings off a bit compared to earlier bemches.

Quote:

the one thing i hate about gigabyte's bios is the CPU GTLREF section..

Yes I've mentioned that myself omn the X38, which was identical. Compared in particular to the Abit X38 Quad , it's not good. Although being dual channel, it's superior to the Asus boards , where only the Asus P5E3 Premium has dual channel, earlier models having single channel only.

In fairness the values used cover what are the percieved presets for the CPU's

Defaults are :-
GTLREf1____GTLRef2
67% (Auto ) 61% - This is also the default setting also on DFI X48 best for 65nm Quad
-3%............-3%
64% ...........58% - Closest to 63% supposedly the optimum 45nm
-6%.............-6%
61% ...........55% - Closest for Dual Core 65nm

I've played around a bit with the settings at the moment -3% on both seems to be giving me the best results.

In the last clock I dropped FSB (vtt) from +0.15 (1.25V absolute) to +0.10v which seems ok

So to sum up the values look ok, but don't see why:-
a) There is such a narrow set of options
b) Why are they hidden

Ace-a-Rue · #**204** 09-05-2008, 19:17

thanks for that explanation because i definitely did not understand any of that before your explanation...i agree, why hide it...the whole concept of "ctrl +F1" is stupid!

Ace-a-Rue · #**205** 09-05-2008, 19:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by supershanks

Nice to see you doing your bit to stop the economic slowdown, your wife must be proud

They seem to be getting bigger , your right, not sure if that means more value for money

the local news here in the states say most economist blew it about us likely heading into a recession...quite the opposite now...just sluggish but things are looking up...NOW...i am a bit more pessimistic about that revised observation...but hey, we are in an election year for a new president so politicians will play games with the economy; about it being bad.

supershanks · #**206** 09-05-2008, 20:58

Quote:

why hide it...the whole concept of "ctrl +F1" is stupid!

Yep you buy an enthusiasts board & they still try to hide features

Quote:

we are in an election year for a new president so politicians will play games with the economy; about it being bad.

Yes truth will come out afterwards

But with economists if you get 4 together, you'll have 4 different views

Ace-a-Rue · #**207** 10-05-2008, 18:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by supershanks

But with economists if you get 4 together, you'll have 4 different views

YUP!...i think that applies to computer enthusasts too!

Ace-a-Rue · #**208** 10-05-2008, 18:50

i am about ready to wrap my thread up over in XS...i've just about done everything to the board with various CPU's...maybe not benched the spectrum of programs but enough for people to get the idea...i guess i could do PCMark 2005 to get an overall evluation of the board with an E8500...thanks for the suggestion SS

supershanks · #**209** 10-05-2008, 19:11

Quote:

YUP!...i think that applies to computer enthusasts too!

No think there's a lot of commonality with us MAX IT OUT

Quote:

..thanks for the suggestion SS

No worries , not that often it comes together like this board has with our respectivd DDR3 & wolfdale, Kind of restores your faith

Think there are a few people starting to think about ddr3 X48 now though with ddr3 $ starting to soften a bit, damn back to economics

Ace-a-Rue · #**210** 11-05-2008, 02:03

well...i took the plunge doing the full PCMark05 bench with the 9800GTX...the overall score came out lower than my IP35 Pro but there are 2 reasons why.

1st, the score for X48 board was 11K while the IP35 PRO scored 13.2K.

the reason for the PRO outscoring the X48 was due to QX9650 versus E8500 and Raid 0 versus a single drive operation.

now, i am going to pull the E8500 and re-insert the QX9650 and also set up an Intel Raid 0...i did not use Intel raid on my PRO board...the bench results came from my Areca Raid card...i don't expect a big difference bewtween the two.

there was a difference between running the bench in Vista64 and XP...Vista64 was about 500 points faster than XP SP2...it could be that XP can not use all of the 4 gb's of memory...that might be the difference.