Intel P965: Mid-Range Performance Sector Roundup
by Gary Key on October 20, 2006 9:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Disk Controller Performance - RAID
Due to the fact that we are testing two new chipsets in the form of the Intel ICH8R and JMicron JMB363 we decided to present a variety of RAID results in our P965 roundup. We utilize the same AnandTech iPeak test that is designed to measure "pure" hard disk controller performance. This consists of the Business Winstone 2004 and MCC Winstone 2004 benchmarks that provide a very good representation of general desktop performance. We also use the same Seagate 7200.10 Barracuda 320GB 7200 RPM SATA drive and average three test runs for the results. In our RAID 1+0 (10) and 0+1 testing, we utilize a four hard drive setup and a three drive combination for our RAID 5 testing.
In a reversal of our single drive tests we see the Intel ICH8R leading the NVIDIA nForce 500 controller in our RAID 0 and RAID 1+0 test results. While the NVIDIA controller still finished ahead of the older ICH7R we see enough improvements in both the ICH8R chipset and drivers to finish first. This surprised us and after running our tests on the ASUS P5N32-SLI Premium (nF590SLI Intel) motherboard we found NVIDIA back in first place with results about 2% better than the ICH8R. However, since this board was not available in time for our roundup the results stand with Intel placing first. We feel like our ASUS P5N-SLI board is just not performing up to par in these particular hard drive tests.
We see the JMicron JMB363 controller finishing behind both the NVIDIA and Intel chipsets in both RAID 0 tests resulting in a slight role reversal from our single drive results. In our Business Winstone test the JMicron results fall behind the ICH8R RAID 1+0 results and NVIDIA 0+1 tests compared to our single SATA drive tests where this controller almost finished first. After reviewing our test scripts we noticed that the 2% read performance advantage this chipset had over the Intel offerings in single drive testing was flipped to a disadvantage of around 1% in RAID 0. We feel like this is a driver issue as the JMicron performed very well in our Content Creation tests where it finished ahead of the NVIDIA chipset in RAID 0.
Our RAID 1+0 and 0+1 tests were slightly surprising as we did not expect our on-board controllers to perform as well as they did when compared to the RAID 0 setup. This is due to our Seagate test drive as our Western Digital 150GB Raptor setup on the same controllers typically showed a 2% to 4% advantage for the RAID 0 setup. Our RAID 5 results were not a surprise as the CPU overhead incurred from either the NVIDIA or Intel drivers generally result in dismal write performance when compared to dedicated hardware based solutions from Highpoint, Broadcom, or Areca.
What we did not expect was the NVIDIA controller performing up to 5% better in RAID 5 after reviewing the RAID 0, 1+0, and 0+1 results between the chipsets. The difference turned out to be improved write speeds with the NVIDIA controller especially in the Content Creation test. Our test scripts showed excellent read speeds from our native chipset based controllers but write speeds were sometimes up to 55% less than our HighPoint RocketRAID 2320 dedicated hardware controller we will be reviewing in the near future. We found the Intel Matrix software interface was generally easier to use to setup up our various RAID arrays although the revised NVIDIA control panel with the nForce 500 series is significantly better now.
Due to the fact that we are testing two new chipsets in the form of the Intel ICH8R and JMicron JMB363 we decided to present a variety of RAID results in our P965 roundup. We utilize the same AnandTech iPeak test that is designed to measure "pure" hard disk controller performance. This consists of the Business Winstone 2004 and MCC Winstone 2004 benchmarks that provide a very good representation of general desktop performance. We also use the same Seagate 7200.10 Barracuda 320GB 7200 RPM SATA drive and average three test runs for the results. In our RAID 1+0 (10) and 0+1 testing, we utilize a four hard drive setup and a three drive combination for our RAID 5 testing.
In a reversal of our single drive tests we see the Intel ICH8R leading the NVIDIA nForce 500 controller in our RAID 0 and RAID 1+0 test results. While the NVIDIA controller still finished ahead of the older ICH7R we see enough improvements in both the ICH8R chipset and drivers to finish first. This surprised us and after running our tests on the ASUS P5N32-SLI Premium (nF590SLI Intel) motherboard we found NVIDIA back in first place with results about 2% better than the ICH8R. However, since this board was not available in time for our roundup the results stand with Intel placing first. We feel like our ASUS P5N-SLI board is just not performing up to par in these particular hard drive tests.
We see the JMicron JMB363 controller finishing behind both the NVIDIA and Intel chipsets in both RAID 0 tests resulting in a slight role reversal from our single drive results. In our Business Winstone test the JMicron results fall behind the ICH8R RAID 1+0 results and NVIDIA 0+1 tests compared to our single SATA drive tests where this controller almost finished first. After reviewing our test scripts we noticed that the 2% read performance advantage this chipset had over the Intel offerings in single drive testing was flipped to a disadvantage of around 1% in RAID 0. We feel like this is a driver issue as the JMicron performed very well in our Content Creation tests where it finished ahead of the NVIDIA chipset in RAID 0.
Our RAID 1+0 and 0+1 tests were slightly surprising as we did not expect our on-board controllers to perform as well as they did when compared to the RAID 0 setup. This is due to our Seagate test drive as our Western Digital 150GB Raptor setup on the same controllers typically showed a 2% to 4% advantage for the RAID 0 setup. Our RAID 5 results were not a surprise as the CPU overhead incurred from either the NVIDIA or Intel drivers generally result in dismal write performance when compared to dedicated hardware based solutions from Highpoint, Broadcom, or Areca.
What we did not expect was the NVIDIA controller performing up to 5% better in RAID 5 after reviewing the RAID 0, 1+0, and 0+1 results between the chipsets. The difference turned out to be improved write speeds with the NVIDIA controller especially in the Content Creation test. Our test scripts showed excellent read speeds from our native chipset based controllers but write speeds were sometimes up to 55% less than our HighPoint RocketRAID 2320 dedicated hardware controller we will be reviewing in the near future. We found the Intel Matrix software interface was generally easier to use to setup up our various RAID arrays although the revised NVIDIA control panel with the nForce 500 series is significantly better now.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
62 Comments
View All Comments
zjohnr - Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - link
In all the features tables for the motherboards in this article the PCI slots are listed as being PCI v2.3. However, looking at the pictures for the boards, the slots have PCI v2.2 keying. I think the entry in the features tables is wrong. (Is it?)Patsoe - Saturday, October 28, 2006 - link
Seeing all the trouble with the P965 - especially with the non-intel p-ata controller and with the ich8r - I'd be inclined to get a Core2-ready i945P board with ICH7R instead. Would that be a sane idea?BadThad - Tuesday, October 24, 2006 - link
Is the v1.02G Asus P5B-E using all solid capacitors? I read a press release stating that Asus was releasing the "P4B-E Plus" version with all solid caps. Rumor says the "Plus" version will not be sold in the USA.....arrgggggg. Tell me that's not true. I want the solid caps for long-term reliability. I'm wondering if our "Plus" is actually the v1.02G?Thanks
Gary Key - Tuesday, October 24, 2006 - link
The 1.01G and 1.02G boards are exactly the same except for a PLL controller. Asus stills states the P5B-Plus will not be imported into the States but you never know.keithke - Monday, October 23, 2006 - link
I was interested to hear you used this Scythe Infinity Air Cooler as I was going to do the same. Were there any issues with the Northbridge heatsink sitting so close? Or did it just plop right in with no spacing issues?Thx
Keith
Gary Key - Tuesday, October 24, 2006 - link
No issues with the Inifinity on all four corners. It is a close fit but it works fine with the enclosed fan.SniperWulf - Monday, October 23, 2006 - link
Hey guys,Did you have any strange anomolies with the X-fi on the DS3 while overclocked? When I was using that board with the F6 bios, I'd have to reboot like 3-4 times before windows would properly detect it. I eventually grew tired of it and bought a P5B-D so I haven't had a chance to try F7 with it.
Gary Key - Monday, October 23, 2006 - link
I did not have any issues with the X-FI on the DS3 when it was overclocked. The F5 and F6 BIOS releases were not X-FI friendly where F4 was perfect. F7 is working for some and not others, I did not have an issue with it. F8 will fix it for good.schlumpfi106 - Monday, October 23, 2006 - link
Im a little bit disappointed that there are so few informations about the cooling/silencing-related capabilitites of the boards. I would like to know how many fans can be connected, if the connectors are 3- or 4-pin, and if there is a way to control the fan speeds (preferably via SpeedFan). I don't care about a one-percent performance difference. My first priority is a reasonably silent system.goinginstyle - Monday, October 23, 2006 - link
He mentioned the number of fan headers on each board and even added a couple of comments on the ones that did not work right. In the features section there was a statement about whether the included utility worked or not. Sure he did not say anything about SpeedFan but how far do you want a guy to go after 26 pages? Also, if you click on the Enlarge picture on the boards you can clearly make out whether the fan headers are 3 or 4 pin.