| ASUS P9X79 Deluxe Motherboard |  |
| Reviews - Featured Reviews: Motherboards | |
| Written by Olin Coles & David Ramsey | |
| Monday, 14 November 2011 | |
|
Page 15 of 17
SPECapc LightwaveSPECapc (Application Performance Characterization) tests are fundamentally different from the SPECviewperf tests. While SPECviewperf tests incorporate code from the various test programs directly into the benchmark, the SPECapc tests are separate scripts and datasets that are run against a stand-alone installation of the program being benchmarked. SPECapc group members sponsor applications and work with end-users, user groups, publications and ISVs to select and refine workloads, which consist of data sets and benchmark script files. Workloads are determined by end-users and ISVs, not SPECapc group members. These workloads will evolve over time in conjunction with end-users' needs and the increasing functionality of PCs and workstations. For this test, I ran the SPECapc "Lightwave" benchmark against a trial installation of Newtek's Lightwave 3D product. The benchmark, developed in cooperation with NewTek, provides realistic workloads that simulate a typical LightWave 3D workflow. It contains 11 datasets ranging from 64,000 to 1.75 million polygons and representing such applications as 3D character animation, architectural review, and industrial design. Scores for individual workloads are composited under three categories: interactive, render and multitask. The benchmark puts special emphasis on processes that benefit from multi-threaded computing, such as animation, OpenGL playback, deformations, and high-end rendering that includes ray tracing, radiosity, complex textures and volumetric lighting. The test reports three scores: Animation (multitasking), Animation (interactive), and Rendering. The numeric scores represent the time it took to complete each section of the benchmark, in seconds, so lower scores are better. I've found the SPECapc Lightwave 3D test to be an excellent indicator of overclock stability. In many cases, overclocked systems that will make it through every other benchmark here will crash in this test. It's also one of the most "fun" benchmarks to watch, as multiple windows with various complex rendering tasks appear and disappear on your screen.
These results illustrate how much difference benchmark configuration can make. SPECviewperf uses embedded code from Lightwave, while SPECapc is actually just a set of scripts that control a standard Lightwave installation. Note that in SPECviewperf's Lightwave section above, the 2600K returned the best performance numbers, while in SPECapc, the Sandy Bridge Extreme wins.
|
|
Comments
Hardware is moving forward and the SSD will be like the change from DVD to Blue-ray. Come on benchmark, you need to show Sata 3 transfer speed and the switch from PCI-E 2.0 to 3.0, how can you leave out the two main factors of motherboards ? ATTO, Furmark, really need to be shown. The difference on Sata 3 with HDD and SSD, and PCI-E 3.0 with say two video cards against these cards on PCI-e 2.0. Motherboard testing without this kind of testing leaves questions that need answers.
I can't believe ASUS put the FAILED Marvell 9128 on the new x79, they keep up this kind of work and they will be laughed out of the MOBO market.
Additionally, we have about one hundred SATA 6Gb/s tests here:
benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=3&Itemid=60
Wouldn't you use a SSD PCI-E ?
not lately from what i have seen - build quality deteriorating from what most people see in fact.Interesting to finish with an assertion about rma's - where does that figure come from?
Just another opinion on potential?
Then my PSU caused a short and burnt the EATX 24pin block, I ran two 6 hr burn in tests on all hardware on the mobo, all test completed fine with no hardware problems. I wanted to have Asus check it and got an RMA. The board was 7 months old.
I received an e-mail, the problem is not under warranty and the board is unrepairable, please send 175.00 for a replacement. Gave the board to a friend and its working fine.
Asus- rotten dirty thieves, last system I will ever build for anyone with Asus. I'll have them spend an extra 200.00 for a ASRock before buying an Asus. I have been buying Gigabytes, only been a few months, but so far the boards are awesome. The only thing is slow booting due to pool data, so you have to install their software to over ride it. Excellent overclock, no problems with XMP with G-skill, Patriot, Corsair. Gigabyte also seems to keep their drivers up to date better then Asus. With building systems I wish I knew as much as Olin and David, but I get by.
Seems most hardware, caps, are all close in quality. I'm just hurt that Asus shunned me, buying tons of their products, Boards, LCD, Coolers, Roms, then to be told to buy another board. They recall cars, they should recall their boards with the 9128. I generally don't fan to one company like most, I don't love Intel or AMD and try and knock the other. Everything can fail. Just disappointing how Asus treated me as a customer. Your site has been a great help and I think you people have done a good job at informing the public.
I would be interested in finding out what issues you have with the 9128? As it is a controller not only we have used but also competitors. This was the first qualified SATA6G controller to come to market in addition the custom firmware support on this controller is what allows us to offer SSD caching on our X79 vs not having it at all. The validation not only performed by us but those of our partners ( like system integrators has validated the solution as being one that is functional and reliable while offering additional functionality ). For a platfrom like X58 this was additionally the only way to intially provide support for SATA6G capacble SSDs when they launched ( like the C300 ). In regards to it not being a true SATA6G controller this is incorrect as it fully supports the specification yes there is a PCI-E link limitation but this does not mean it will not offer single SSD performance for a SATA6G SSD compared to SATA3G SATA port that is part of the PCH. If you have other feedback as always we are interested in hearing it.
Regards,
JJ
gtx 580 video card and vertex 3 240 gb but the system runs slower then my previus pc is that normal ?????????????
No need for water-cooling.