| ASUS P9X79 WS LGA2011 Workstation Motherboard |  |
| Reviews - Featured Reviews: Motherboards | |
| Written by David Ramsey | |
| Tuesday, 17 January 2012 | |
|
Page 7 of 17
CINEBENCH R11.5 BenchmarksMaxon CINEBENCH is a real-world test suite that assesses the computer's performance capabilities. CINEBENCH is based on Maxon's award-winning animation software, Cinema 4D, which is used extensively by studios and production houses worldwide for 3D content creation. Maxon software has been used in blockbuster movies such as Spider-Man, Star Wars, The Chronicles of Narnia, and many more. CINEBENCH Release 11.5 includes the ability to more accurately test the industry's latest hardware, including systems with up to 64 processor threads, and the testing environment better reflects the expectations of today's production demands. A more streamlined interface makes testing systems and reading results incredibly straightforward. The CINEBENCH R11.5 test scenario comprises three tests: an OpenGL-based test that models a simple car chase, and single-core and multi-core versions of a CPU-bound computation using all of a system's processing power to render a photo-realistic 3D scene, "No Keyframes", the viral animation by AixSponza. This scene makes use of various algorithms to stress all available processor cores, and all rendering is performed by the CPU: the graphics card is not involved except as a display device. The multi-core version of the rendering benchmark uses as many cores as the processor has, including the "virtual cores" in processors that support Hyper-Threading. The resulting "CineMark" is a dimensionless number only useful for comparisons with results generated from the same version of CINEBENCH.
Overclocking helps a bit (+14%) in the Multi Core Rendering test. CINEBENCH is a good benchmark to thrash multi-core CPUs since it will keep every core fully saturated. Let's take a look at some CPU-limited gaming results in the next section.
|
|
Comments
Please read chapter 2.3.11 "USB BIOS Flashback".
benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=4&Itemid=61
Also, I don't know of anyone who builds workstation machines in a rackmount case. Servers are usually fitted into a rack, and workstations are usually on a desk.
My point was simple, Audio Engineering being my profession and game stations my hobby, there is a market for rack mount Case reviews. There are dozens of Turn-Key Rack Mount WS for Pro applications used in Broadcasting, Film, and Recording Industries; its been that way for years. Laboratory applications also used machine racked WS. I have friends that travel with their lab in shock mounted road cases. Many engineers build a lot of what they used, including the Mother Ship. Enough with the HTPC cases, I would like to see some pro 19" machine racks chassis, so I can utilize a PX979 and the USB 3 and SATA 6Gb/s features, not mention keeping the WS cool.
And yes I would happy to build 64GBDDR work station for audio/video production.
Rack Mount Cases
Unloaded examples:
ANTEC 4U22EPS650 4U Rackmount with ATX12V v2.0 PSU
ARK TECHNOLOGIES 4U/IPC-4550
Loaded Pro Audio examples:
Sweetwater CSRackXT Creation Station Rack Extreme Core i7 CPU, 6GB DDR3 RAM, Seagate 500GB and 1TB Hard Drives, GeForce 9500GT Video Card
Or check this sexy thing:
#raincomputers.com/products/ion/
And Peter thank you for also noticing the need for a pro level chassis for an exciting pro-level motherboard like the PX979.
And always remember, don't sell yourself short on PSU's, buy big wattage and let the gaming begin.
That's not to say that there aren't suitable rackmount cases out there...but these don't seem to be them.
Could you try again, using small words and simple concepts, so I can understand?
As Peter and I agree there have been many benchmarkviews.com articles on HTPC cases, mini's and of course our fav gaming towers, but with recent bus advancements and the increase capabilities of higher end high RAM motherboards, such as the P9X79, there is a need for 19" rack mount chassis cases that can incorporate these high RAM hotrods. It had little to do with the P9X79 performance, and more to do with real world application. There is a need and as I asked, and Peter agreed, it would be great to see reviews on some 19" racks to match the P9X79, of which I cannot recall any 19" RU enclosure reviews in recent times. I only use the Antec and Ark Tech as examples that manufactures do understand the need for such products and there are AMD Black and i7 rack mount machines for professional level application (Rain Recording). The rendering of A/V productions re: Film, Game Design, etc., crunches numbers just as hard as when I throw Crysis, Dragon Age or X3 on my Gigabyte/AMD game rig in a Windstorm tower. I have Macs for in-house a/v production but use PC notebooks on the road for particular reasons, one being cost. I have not bought a PC tower in over 15 years and have no plans to buy one when I can build my own. Why not, Fry's is 15 minutes away?
That said, your comment stating the examples I referred to, do not match the example's specs,(Antec), I replied "exactly, that's the point." I, and probably Peter too, would like to see newer 19" RU's enclosures fitting of newer bussing technologies i.e. SATA6 and USB3, and physical WS board dimensions as they come available and I hope they do. In fact I going to shoot Antec an email on the subject.
David, thank you for another in depth review. The site offers the best information I can usually find and I appreciate the articles,,, keeps me thinking.
Once again thanks and all the best.
The "30% graphics boost with 4-way SLI" ASUS touts on the box is in comparison to a 3-way SLI (or, presumably, 3-way CrossFireX) system. In reality, of course, you'll rarely see perfect scaling in performance when adding more graphics cards, especially when going from three to four.
endQuote"
I keep hearing that presumption ( U Will Not See CLOSE TO near perfect Scaling! ) when in my experience ( with tri sli admittedly ) I see very good scaling making 3 27 inch Acer Monitors in 3D and surround bearable.
I see comparison arguments/charts where SLI x16 vs x8 vs x4 speed do not make a 7 percent difference until surround/eyefinity resolutions are used. And knowing that! The same reviewers do not add 3D on top of that were the difference is suddenly OVER 10% and make quite a big difference when yer trying to turn everything up in Battlefield 3 and Metro 2033.
Between Maya and Zbrush and Photoshop open at the sametime and 3dSurround playtime in Arkham City, I have to wonder? Are there really that many secretaries reading an enthusiast review of a $350 motherboard? What does anyone use a computer for otherwise that does not require more power than will be available in my lifetime.
I know indie and lo fi trendy is perty hip nowadayz but I got a billion tris werth of creativity and openworlds as big as states in my handicapped imagination ready to bring yer strongest computer to it's knees! I want mo POWER~!
You just explained why you see good scaling - you put a good load on your cards.
SLI scaling depends on your load versus the SLI overhead.
Run a single display, 2D, at 1920x1080 or less, low AA (or none).
Then look at your scaling, it will be OK from 1 card to 2, meh from 2 to 3, and probably negative from 3 to 4.
You could say 'so what, because no one will get quad SLI for that rez'.
But some people want to go with 120hz displays, 2D, and maintain a MINIMUM fps of 120, basically valuing supreme smoothness over appearance.
Then you find your options limited.
Say 1 card is too slow to give you minimum of 120 fps.
2 might do it with some conservative settings.
And if you still can't get there, adding more cards will only hurt your performance.
So you're basically stuck until a next gen card that can perform faster.
-scheherazade
Consider, possibly lowering the Value score for this board? And maybe increasing the appearance score? Probably this will have no overall effect to the total score, but this might be more in line with the reviewer's actual written conclusion: "At $380, the ASUS P9X79 WS motherboard is almost double the price of the top-rated ASUS P8Z68-V Pro LGA1155 motherboard. This is why system builders will want to carefully consider which X79 Express motherboard they choose for their next rig."
Also, Sandy Bridge E processors are so powerful that the need for multi-CPU motherboards is reduced, even in workstation situations. 12 threads can handle a lot.
The P9X79 WS motherboard does cost almost twice as much as the P8Z68-V Pro, but that's the cost of getting into Sandy Bridge E right now. The big win for workstation applications is the 40 PCI-E lanes you get from that CPU (as compared to the measly 16 you get from a 2700K), which is something that multi-GPU rigs can use.
Lastly, although you and I would probably find a thorough review of a multi-CPU workstation motherboard interesting, it probably wouldn't appeal to the vast majority of our readers.
It appears to me that for one to be interested in this board, one must either need it for its phenomenal thruput in order to make a living with it, or have a bunch of cash to build something they can boast to their friends about. Few if any have have 8 channel memory like this one does. Few if any have 40 PCI-E lanes. I have built some of the P8 series boards that really cooked and did a fine job, but they don't hold a candle to this P9 in video editing and CAD. Hooking up an SSD as a drive casche makes this board jump out in front of most. Yes, sombody will say "mine is better because--- ", but that's OK. Don't speculate, build it. Prove your point. Yea, and rack mount it.
-- It has four channel memory (like all X79 boards), not 8 channel memory
-- Total PCI-E lanes: 48, 40 from CPU and 8 from X79 chipset. This compares to 42 total lanes for an AMD FX system and 40 in an X58 system.