The Breakdown:

This will be a straight comparison between these two above cards. It is unbiased with no agenda or “BS” whatsoever! There are people out there who believe that some sites get paid off by big companies to present their product in a good light, well not us. We will bring you honest results which we stand behind and would not be ashamed to show anyone at anytime. You will be able to find correct figures for the system and settings we used. All systems will be a little different, so keep this in mind.  Don’t go off on a tangent because a game is a few FPS different than yours.

Test System:

Overclocked:

*Red = ATI, Green =Nvidia*

3dMark:

Bad Company 2:

World in Conflict:

Synthetic Benchmarks:

3dMark:

FurMark:

Unigine – Heaven v2.1

Unigine – Tropics v1.3

Unigine – Sanctuary v2.3

Game Benchmarks:

*All tests ran at the applications highest allowable detailed settings*

Battlefield – Bad Company 2:

Call of Juarez:

Champions Online:

Company of Heroes:

Warhammer – Dawn of War II:

Dirt 2:

Far Cry 2:

Final Fantasy XIV:

Fuel:

Tom Clancy’s – Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter:

Just Cause 2:

Mass Effect 2:

Call of Duty – Modern Warfare 2:

Operation Flashpoint 2 – Dragon Rising:

Risen:

S.T.A.L.K.E.R.:

1920×1200

1920×1080:

1680×1050:

1600×1200:

Street Fighter IV:

Team Fortress 2:

Wings of Prey:

World in Conflict:

Temperatures:

Computer Case

Tech Station

Temperatures were pretty even until we moved into the overclocked settings. Running at stock speeds, the two cards run at about the same temperature, with Nvidia taking the slight lead in load temperature. However, the 5870 does have a commanding lead in the idle/web surfing tasks with a 14-16C difference. I think this probably comes as a shock to most people, seeing everyone talks about how hot the Nvidia cards are in every aspect. The GTX480 was very respectable at stock speeds, but where the 5870 shines is in the overclocking. You can run this card fully overclocked and not turn your room into a sauna, the same cannot be said for the 480, with it hitting 99-100C during testing!

Power Consumption:

Notice in the test below that this is total system power consumption. We tried our best to push the load as much as possible on the video card and nothing else. We ran FurMark at the highest settings our system would allow and we feel this gives the most reliable readings on GPU load and on how much wattage the cards put out without stressing other components in the system too much. (Total consumption measured at outlet.)

As you can see from the chart above, the 5870 wins the power consumption tests hands down. With the 5870 overclocked, it is still under max load wattage of the stock GTX480. With the 480 overclocked, it raises some eyebrows with the amount of watts that the card eats up. This could be a problem for someone who is not expecting that much load and does not have an adequate power supply. Just be aware of this before buying.

Fan Noise:

We would have to say this is pretty much a tie between the two cards. They are both quiet during basic use, and then, they both get extremely annoying once the fan kicks in and you hit a higher percentage of fan use. So knowing how both fans sound, we could not give the edge to either of the cards. You could always water cool both cards and then you would no longer have to worry!

Conclusion:

As you saw from all of the gaming and synthetic benchmark tests we ran on the two cards, the GTX480 seemed to be in the lead for the majority of them. We thought the HD5870 would put up more of a fight than it did and we were wrong! The 5870 got “beaten up” for the most part and we almost felt bad. It was like putting a college freshman up against a well-seasoned senior in football. With that said, though, the 5870 is still an fantastic card. Yes, it did get beat, but if you look at the numbers it was cranking out, they were still very impressive, and it will easily run any game on the market without a problem. For the most part, the 480 will be able to boast of a few extra FPS while running the same games. We are guessing that the extra boost in performance is why the GTX480 costs $499, while the HD5870 is a little cheaper at $429 (these are MSRP prices of course).

There were a few bright spots for the HD5870, such as when we ran the power consumption and temperature tests. The 5870 was definitely the big winner in both of these tests. The idle power consumption of the overclocked GTX480 is actually superior to the overclocked 5870. This was a big surprise to us once we saw the final numbers on power usage. Just keep in mind how much power the GTX480 uses while overclocked under load as this could cause a potential system failure if your PSU is not up to snuff. Temperatures were also a big plus for the 5870. The stock idle temperatures were very low, but where it really shines is once we overclocked it. The max temperature we saw was only 84C, however, when we overclocked the GTX480 we saw a massive jump in temperatures with a max temperature of 100C! That is just a bit too high for us to feel comfortable while gaming for extended periods of time.

Overall, both cards were extremely impressive! You cannot go wrong with either choice, however, there are a few give-and-takes with both cards when considering the temperatures, power consumption, and price versus the game performance. It may also depend on how you feel about the cards and your brand loyalty, which personally we feel shouldn’t come in to play, but some can be more passionate in this regard. We can safely say that both cards will have no problem playing any game on the market. We are hoping this review will help you in your decision on which card or brand may be best for you. The results above were 100% legitimate and without biased opinions or personal agendas presented in the article. Take it for what it is; the truth between the two graphics cards.

Long story short. Today I got pretty bored. I’ve been wanting to put my 1090T under dry ice for quite some time now. However, my bench partner has been busy with work so I could not obtain the dry ice pot.

So I was thinking of ways I could cool down my processor, in order to play around with my new 6 core. Since I own a Corsair H50 AIO Watercooling kit, I decided to have some fun.

I hung the radiator in an old lunch cooler and filled it to the brim with ice. I also threw a bit of water in for more cooling surface area. I figured this could get my processor 5°C or below. I was right. Yes, the slushbox idea is not a brand new innovative one, but I wanted to try my chip under something else then regular cooling for now.

So I pushed my processor to frequencies I only previously thought could be attained on dry ice (at least with my deneb’s). It seems these new Thuban chips pack quite the punch when it comes to running up the frequency.

Anyways. Enough with the chit chat. I threw together another youtube short just like the good old days when I played with my denebs. So here you are: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wwb1K3_G7Mg

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wwb1K3_G7Mg]

Here are all the screenshot results and validations:

4250MHz Prime 95 Stable 1 Hour

I wanted to see how the slushbox worked under a real stress and if the chip would stay stable. The slushbox doesn’t deal with loads too well, but is still kept below 32C at all times. I believe if I had a good enough water setup, I could attain this stable speed no problem without any slushbox at all.

SuperPi 1m @ 4662MHz

I ramped up SuperPi to see what this chip can do. On my previous deneb chips, SuperPi 1m was my bread and butter, my favourite benchmark to run. Since SuperPi is a single threaded application, I imagine if I disabled some cores or ramped up only one core I could get better results.

SuperPi 32m @ 4500MHz                                                        SuperPi 32m @ 4571MHz

My first run was kind of on the safe side. To avoid a crash. However for second run I ramped up the processor a bit. This was the max I could go while still using all 6 cores. Once again, being single threaded, disabling cores might be able to help my clocking.

wPrime 32m @ 4500MHz

wPrime 1024m @ 4250MHz                                    wPrime  1024M @ 4409MHz

PiFast @ 4500MHz PiFast @ 4553MHz

Cinebench 11.5 @ 4250MHz Cinebench 11.5 @ 4427MHz

3DMark Vantage @ 4427MHz

SiSoft Sandra @ 4427MHz

CPUZ SS @ 4730MHz – Validation

In the video I attained a speed of 4.75GHz, however it was not stable for validation nor screenshot. It was only a taken as a video clip. The cpu did not last very long at 4.75GHz and crashed soon after.

Packaging:

The ASUS EAH5870:

Specifications and Features:

Specifications:

• Bus Standard: PCI Express 2.1
• Video Memory: GDDR5 1G
• Engine Clock: 850 MHz
• Memory Clock: 4.8 GHz ( 1.2 GHz DDR5 )
• Memory Interface: 256-bit
• D-Sub Max Resolution: 2048 x 1536
• DVI Max Resolution: 2560 x 1600
• D-Sub Output: Yes x 1 (via DVI to D-Sub adaptor x 1 )
• DVI Output: Yes x 2 (via HDMI to DVI adaptor x 1 )
• HDMI Output: Yes x 1
• DisplayPort: Yes
• HDCP Support: Yes
• Adapter/Cable Bundled: 1 x DVI to D-Sub adaptor
• 1 x CrossFire cable
• 2 x Power cable
• 1 x HDMI to DVI adaptor
• Software Bundled ASUS Utilities & Driver
• Note the Card Size is 10.25 inches x 5 inches.

Features:

Overclocking Software and Results:

ASUS SmartDoctor is included as one of the utilities on your ASUS driver CD. Once installed and running, you will be greeted with the above screen. This is where you can tweak the voltage on the card. You will also be able to change your core speed and memory from this area as well. Our one complaint with the software, as mentioned in our ENGTX480 review, is the GUI. It looks so 90’s compared to other software on the market that does the same thing. We think the GUI could use a nice revamping to give it a better and more up-to-date look.

In the ‘Settings’ area of SmartDoctor, you can see two different sections, one for fan control and another for temperature alarm. The Fan Control section is very easy to customize and will let you set how fast you want your fan running at specific temperatures. This is a very simple way to tweak the fan settings in order to get the most out of your card. The other screen shot (right) let’s you put alarm settings on your video card’s temperatures. This may help keep your mind at ease during long gaming sessions.

Overclocking Results:

We started overclocking with no voltage tweak, just to see what we could get out of the card, for people who do not like to mess with voltages. We finally ended up with an overclock of 950/1335, a 9.4% gain on core speeds and 11.2% increase on memory speeds. Next, we upped the voltage to 1.39 on the 5870 and ended up with a nice overclock of 1008/1351, a 16.1% increase on core speeds and 12.5% increase on memory speeds. Overall, these are very nice overclocks, as no overclocking is guaranteed by manufacturers.

Overclocked Benchmarks:

All Settings At Stock:

CPU stock GPU OC @ 950/1335

CPU stock GPU OC @ 1008/1351 @ 1.39v

CPU @ 4GHz GPU OC @ 1008/1351 @ 1.39v

3dMark – All Settings

We will not add much to the charts above as they do a great job of speaking for themselves. You can clearly see what each setting used on the video card will get you in terms of gaming performance. Now you can make a more informed decision on what settings you will need to run your game of choice, whether it is overclocked or not.

Synthetic Benchmarks:

3dMark:

FurMark v1.7:

Unigine – Heaven v2.1

Unigine – Tropics v1.3

Unigine: Sanctuary v2.3

Game Benchmarks:

*All tests ran at the applications highest allowable detailed settings*

Alien Breed Evolution:

Battlefield – Bad Company 2:

Call of Juarez:

Champions Online:

Company of Heroes:

Warhammer – Dawn of War II:

Devil May Cry 4:

Dirt 2:

Far Cry 2:

Final Fantasy XIV:

Fuel:

Tom Clancy’s – Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter:

Just Cause 2:

Mass Effect 2:

Call of Duty – Modern Warfare 2:

Risen:

S.T.A.L.K.E.R.:

1920×1200

1920×1080:

1680×1050:

1600×1200:

Street Fighter IV:

Team Fortress 2:

Wings of Prey:

World in Conflict:

Temperatures:

Computer Case

Tech Station

With the temperature chart above, you can see how good the temperatures really are with this card. Idle temperatures, under all three clock settings, are very low and acceptable for any air-cooled card. The ASUS EAH5870 does a great job at keeping load temperatures in check, even when we raised the voltage on the card, the load temperature only reached 84C with FurMark running. This is a great accomplishment to have a card with this much horsepower not melt everything in sight while running Furmark on the stock cooler. We were quite impressed with just how well the ASUS EAH5870 did in our temperature test.

Power Consumption:

Notice in the test below that this is total system power consumption. We tried our best to push the load as much as possible on the video card and nothing else. We ran FurMark at the highest settings our system would allow. We feel FurMark gives the most reliable readings on GPU load and on how much wattage it puts out without stressing other components in the system too much. (Total consumption measured at outlet.)

With the tests above, you can see just how much wattage you can expect to use during gaming/benchmarking. This should assist you with your PSU shopping and the uncertainties that it always brings. You can now refer to the chart above, and make a better decision on how many watts your PSU will need to be able to deliver. The chart will also give you an idea of what to expect from the much loved energy bill you will get every month. The power consumption of this card is definitely not as much as we were thinking it would be. The 5870 had a very friendly 419w usage, fully loaded and overclocked, with extra voltage added to it. Idle wattage is also quite low, which is nice because we can’t always be gaming, as unfortunate as that may be. Overall, very respective numbers in terms of power consumption for such a powerful card. ATI worked hard on this aspect and it shows.

Fan Noise:

We did not have a decibel meter handy at the time of testing. However, you really don’t need one because there is a definite point where you will start to notice the fan. We have found this line to be at just about the 55% mark.  You will notice, without a doubt, that the fan is working when you crank up the fan to 100%.  There is no way a normal person can sit in the same room for an extended period of time at this speed. It drove us crazy while we ran it for a few tests, and that was only for about 10 minutes. Maybe some people like the sound of a jet engine coming from their case, however, we could certainly do without it. Suffice it to say that you will not want to leave the fan running at 100% for extended periods of time, but for short benching runs it should be tolerable. The good thing about this card is that with the overall cool temperatures that the card produces, you will rarely, if ever, have to hear the fan noise much over 60%. For this, we are grateful to ASUS/ATI and the cooling solution they have provided.

Conclusion:

Overall, the ASUS EAH5870 did a great job with everything we tested it with. It took graphically demanding games and pulled up a lawn chair, sat back, laughed at them, and asked for more. The 5870 kept all the minimum FPS at a playable level at all times. We feel the minimum FPS is one statistic overlooked in gaming and other benchmarks and this is why we provide minimum, maximum, and average FPS for all to see. Average FPS alone can be very misleading, so we make the extra effort to show you everything we can. Overclocking the card was easy, as we have come to expect from ASUS and their great bundled tweaking software. Once they update the interface of the software, we will be sure to shut up about the Windows 95 look of it.

Temperatures of the 5870 were better than expected. We were thinking a card with this much power/performance would crank out a lot of heat. The 82C max temperature we saw with Furmark was a pleasant surprise. As most people will not ever see this temperature, unless possibly while benchmarking, this is great news. The fan, however, is still loud once the card gets hot and the fan gets above 60% speed. This is not a big concern, as explained above, as it would only get to that point during benching.

Our final thought? We would not think twice about recommending this card to any of our friends. The ASUS EAH5870 is a great performing card! For the price, you cannot go wrong and we would be hard pressed to find any competition for it in this range. ASUS has a winner on their hands with the EAH5870, and it will definitely be a card to reckon with for a long time to come.

The ASUS EAH5870 V2 has earned the TechREACTION.net Gold Silicon Award!







You can find the ASUS EAH5870 V2 currently on sale at NewEgg for $389.99 (after MIR).

Thank you to ASUS for the review sample.

Corporate Info:

Super Talent Technology Corporation, headquartered in San Jose, California, designs and manufactures a full range of DDR, DDR2, and DDR3 memory modules and Flash based storage solutions for Enterprise Servers, Workstations, Personal Computers and Consumer Electronics. An ISO 9001 certified company, Super Talent utilizes its state-of-the art factory and leading-edge components to produce award winning products with exceptional performance and outstanding reliability. Super Talent is an active member of JEDEC, ONFI and USB-IF standards bodies, and holds over 200 patents in Flash and DRAM technology.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Preface:

I’ve recently picked up my own pair of this aggressively priced entusiast DDR3 by Super Talent. Located on 2077 North Capitol Avenue, San Jose, CA and founded by Abraham Ma, founder and CEO of MA Labs, Super Talent started itself as a US company offering Value RAM at low prices. When DDR2 rolled around, Super Talent stepped up to the plate and offered some very enticing DRAM offers using enthusiast-loved Micron D9 IC’s. Super Talent made it’s name known. DDR3 appeared and Super Talent quickly took the lead with it’s screaming fast “Project X” modules. The company has now designed low-voltage enthusiast modules based around Elpida Hyper for Intel’s P55 platform.

This is one of those kits.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Test System:

AMD Phenom II 965 BE  C3 @ 3.4-3.6 Ghz
ASUS M4A89TD Pro/USB3
4GB Super Talent Speed Series DDR3-2200 CL8 at CL6-6-6-18 1T
Two Sapphire HD5770 Vapor-X in CrossfireX
OCZ GameXStream 700w
Intel X25-V
Two Western Digital Caviar Black 640GB in RAID 0
Custom Water Loop

____________________________________________________________________________________

Testing methodology:

 
In this review, I will test this kit at 4 different voltages (1.5v, 1.6v, 1.65v, 1.7v) at CL6-6-6-18 1T for maximum stable frequencies in Prime95. CL6 is chosen due to Integrated Memory Controller constraints of my CPU. Each test will last one hour, and then I will turn it off and move to the next voltage.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Testing Results:

 1.50v: 1512 Mhz

1.60v: 1621 Mhz

1.65v: 1670 Mhz

1.70v: 1718 Mhz

Final Result at CL6: 

Rating:

Asthetics: 9

Functionality: 8

Performance: 7

Value: 8

Final Score: 8/10

Conclusion:

These sticks can be had in the US for a mere $219.99 on Ewiz.com at time of writing. While not up to par as most Elpida Hyper Sticks, these sticks do exibit a much smaller price. Performance per price is outstanding and this kit is perfect for anyone who runs a normal everyday machine. Even that bencher on a budget would love these sticks. Be it a cruncher, folder, gamer, or multitasker, this kit will get the job done without leaving too big a hole in your wallet. Thanks for reading!

Packaging:

The ASUS ENGTX 480:

Specifications and Features:

Specifications:

• Graphics Engine NVIDIA GeForce GTX480
• Bus Standard PCI Express 2.0
• Video Memory GDDR5 1536MB
• Engine Clock 700 MHz
• Shader Clock 1401 MHz
• Memory Clock 3696 MHz ( 924 MHz DDR5 )
• RAMDAC 400MHz
• Memory Interface 384-bit
• D-Sub Max Resolution 2048 x 1536
• DVI Max Resolution 2560 x 1600
• D-Sub Output Yes x 1 (via DVI to D-Sub adaptor x 1 )
• DVI Output Yes x 2 (DVI-I)
• HDMI Output Yes x 1
• HDCP Support Yes
• Adapter/Cable Bundled 1 x DVI to D-Sub adaptor
• Software Bundled ASUS Utilities & Driver
• Design Garage&Supersonic Sled
• Note The card size is 11” x 5.5” inch

Features:

• NVIDIA PhysX™ ready
• Microsoft® DirectX® 11 Support - Bring new levels of visual realism to gaming on the PC and get top-notch performance
• Microsoft® Windows® 7 Ready - Enable PC users to enjoy an advanced computing experience and to do more with their PC
• SLI Support - Multi-GPU technology for extreme performance ode
• Take Your Game Beyond HD -Dual-link DVI able to drive the industry’s largest & highest resolution flat-panel displays up to 2560×1600

Test system:

Overclocking Software and Results:

ASUS SmartDoctor Overclocking Software:

ASUS SmartDoctor is included as one of the utilities on your ASUS driver CD. Once installed and running, you will be greeted with the above screen. This is where you can tweak the voltage on the card. You will also be able to change your core speed and memory from this area as well. Our one complaint with the software is the GUI. It looks so 90’s compared to other software on the market that does the same thing. We think the GUI could use a nice revamping to give it a better and more up to date look.

In the ‘Settings’ area of SmartDoctor you can see two different sections. The Fan Control section is very easy to customize and will let you set how fast your want your fan running at certain specific temperatures. This is a very simple way to tweak the fan settings to get the most out of your card. The other screenshot (right) let’s you put alarm settings on your video card’s temperatures. This may help keep your mind at ease during long gaming sessions.

Overclocking:

Overclocking the ASUS GTX480 was actually very simple. After a few minutes of tinkering with the card, we finally got our max overclock of 852MHz core and 3696MHz memory (stock) with 1.138v. We are pretty sure the card has a lot more to give. However, without being able to get the temperatures under control on air, we could not go any further. With a 859MHz core clock we saw artifacts and reached a whopping 102C. If we were able to put the card under water, we are pretty sure we could squeeze a little more out of it. One thing we did notice, in the picture (below), every time we tried to overclock the memory, even the slightest bit, we would get this error. With this error message, it made the memory impossible to push any further than it already was. This is a little disappointing, but what can you do?

Overclocked Game Benchmarks:

3dMark:

Battlefield – Bad Company 2:

Stock

CPU @ 4GHz // GPU @ 852/3696

World In Conflict:

Stock

CPU @ 4GHz // GPU @ 852/3696

We will let our charts do most of the talking, however we would like to point out one thing from the charts above. As you can see in the Bad Company 2 comparison, it increased minimum FPS from as little as 4 to as high as 21 FPS. These are huge gains, we feel, as minimum FPS is where you will see all of your lag and stuttering. If these numbers are high, like they are in Bad Company 2, it will severely limit the lag/stuttering in your game play which will make your gaming a much more enjoyable experience.

Synthetic Benchmarks:

3dMark:

FurMark:

Unigine – Heaven V2.1

Unigine – Tropics V1.3

Unigine – Sanctuary V2.3

Game Benchmarks:

*All tests ran at the applications highest allowable detailed settings*

Alien Breed – Evolution

Battlefield – Bad Company 2

Call of Juarez:

Champions Online

Company of Heroes:

Warhammer 40K – Dawn of War II:

Devil May Cry 4:

Dirt 2:

Far Cry 2:

Final Fantasy XIV:

Fuel:

Global Agenda:

Tom Clancy’s – Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter:

Grid:

Just Cause 2:

Mass Effect 2:

Call of Duty – Modern Warfare 2:

Operation Flashpoint 2 – Dragon Rising:

Risen:

S.T.A.L.K.E.R.:

1920x1200

1920x1080

1680x1050

1600x1200

Street Fight IV:

Team Fortress 2:

Wings of Prey:

World In Conflict:

Temperatures:

The testing conditions were as follows.

• Ambient Room Temp: 27-28C
• Ambient checked before and after tests.
• Card left idle at test settings for 20 minutes to get back to idle temperature.
• Tested on both our tech station and inside a computer case.
• Load temperatures checked with FurMark and Bad Comapny 2

Tech Station

Computer Case

With the charts above, you should notice two things right away. The temperatures from the tech station to the computer case were almost exactly the same. Once extra volts are applied to achieve a higher overclock, the card starts producing unbearable heat. It heated up our lab noticeably in about 15 minutes of just running the overclocked tests that you saw above. With the card reaching 99-100C fully overclocked, it can be safely said that it is the hottest card we have ever tested! Playing a game with this card is not too bad, however if you play games for extended periods of time while overclocked, it will most likely become unbearably hot in the room. Trust us! We would highly recommend water cooling or other high-end aftermarket cooling for this card if you plan to overclock it. With that said, as long as you run it at stock settings, the card seems to keep the temperature at a very respectable level.

Power Consumption:

Notice in the test below that this is total power consumption. We tried our best to push the load as much as possible on the video card and nothing else. We ran FurMark at the highest settings our system would allow. We feel FurMark gives the most reliable readings on GPU load and on how much wattage it puts out without stressing other components in the system too much. (Total consumption measured at outlet.)

With the tests above, you can see just how much wattage you can expect to use during gaming/benchmarking. This should assist you with your PSU shopping and the uncertainties that it always brings. You can now refer to the chart above and make a better decision on how many watts your PSU needs to be able to deliver. The chart will also give you an idea of what to expect from the much loved energy bill you get every month. As you may have noticed with stock settings, the load is not too high at 442w. The shocker here is what we ran into when we had the card fully overclocked and fully loaded.  This beast eats through 682w of raw power!  You should have seen our jaws drop when we saw it hit 682w! Such a leap in power consumption was not expected, but that appears to be the nature of the Fermi architecture.

Fan Noise:

One of the main areas in which high performance GPU’s have issues is the noise created from the fans trying to keep the GPU cool. Once again, this is sadly the case for the GTX 480.  However, a bright spot in this negative aspect is that the fan does not create a high pitch squeal/scream like some of the other cards we have tested. Though it is loud and rather obnoxious when it hits high speeds. We will stick with our opinion, previously stated in other reviews, that a single fan cannot adequately cool a monster card like the GTX 480, nor will it ever be quiet at high speeds. Multi-fan solutions seem to be the best way to go from what we have seen/tested. We will say that the fan does a great job of cooling and keeping the noise level under control the majority of the time and especially when at stock speeds. A gaming session, unfortunately, will bring out the sometimes obnoxious noise that the single fan creates. You can get around this to a certain extent by running the card at stock settings.

Conclusion:

Overall, the ASUS ENGTX 480 did an amazing job! It took everything we threw at it, chewed it up and gave us an outstanding performance in the games that we tested it with. We are keen on minimum FPS, as we feel this is one of the most important parts of gaming. The GTX 480 kept the minimum FPS levels at a very respectable and playable level in all of the games tested. This is a big plus because while others may be hitting a lag spike here and there, you are not! We figured there might be a game or two that would give this card some problems, but frankly we were wrong. Even when we tested every game under maximum allowable settings, the GTX 480 kept on kickin’!

We will have to dock the card some points however, for the extreme fan noise and high temperatures. The fan noise is not too bad and as we said earlier, you can tweak the settings and run the card at stock speeds which should be perfectly fine in regards to the noise levels. We just cannot say the same if you begin to overclock the card, and you will definitely need a water cooling setup to keep your sanity. Really though, the major concern we have with the card is the outrageous overclocked temperatures (100C… really?). These cards have not been on the market long enough to find out just how such heat will effect the card over the long term. So, if they can handle the heat and last for years and years, then more power to them, but only time will tell on that. We would also like to point out that when the card runs at stock settings, we have no gripe with the temperatures and this is how the consumer should look at the card.

Having said all this, we would not hesitate to recommend this beast to our friends. The voltage tweak is a great tool and comes in very handy to get the most out of this card that you can. The temperature issues when overclocking can be easily solved by using aftermarket cooling, which most enthusiasts purchasing this card will want to do anyway. The performance of the ASUS ENGTX480 is impressive! It can take on any game on the market and asks for more! This is huge for us because there are some amazing games out there now and after this year’s E3, we know they are many many more to come. This is one card you can’t go wrong with from a performance standpoint.

The ASUS GeForce ENGTX480 receives the TechREACTION.net Gold Silicon Award!

Thank you to ASUS for the review sample! You can find this card at most any online retailer, including NewEgg!

Factors contributing to unreliable test results that can be controlled by the tester:

• Air temperature and humidity: When doing a comparison, temperature and humidity should be kept the same, or at least as close as possible.
• Location: Testing should be done in an area that has little air movement or an area with a reasonably controllable environment.
• Sunlight: Testing in direct sunlight will skew results.
• Electronic devices: Most electronic devices expel heat. Avoid testing near such devices, if this is unavoidable, make sure that the device is in the same state for all testing; preferably off.
• Other environmental considerations: Consider air movement; as limiting air movement will eliminate many variables.

1. If central air is being used, the testing should be done near the thermostatic control unit as this will limit many of the temperature variances that occur in a structure between on/off cycles.
2. Fans: Box, osculating, ceiling or any other type of fan should be turned off.
3. The testing should not be near an air duct.

Eliminating the biggest contributor to inaccurate results (the computer):

The computer needs to be eliminated from the equation if a heat sink is to be tested accurately.

• Background operations that are controlled through the services settings panel in the administrative control panel need to be completely eliminated, as these may cause random CPU cycles.
• Legacy buses (dumb buses) need to be disabled as they are polled by the CPU.
• Motherboard monitoring hardware and software are not always dependable and accurate.
• CPUs and Chipsets have been known to have temperature monitoring issues.

Building an external test unit is the only way to eliminate the factors that are beyond the tester’s control.

Components and tools used for testing. Only the fan headers are used on the motherboard. Molex to fan header adapters are available.

A water tight pan and standard PSU are used for testing as well.

Transfer blocks need to be lapped and mounted with thermal transfer adhesive.

A hole needs to be drilled for thermocouple insertion. The hole above is 7/8" deep with a 5/8" counter bore to allow the thermocouple ball to fit tightly.

Using non-conductive thermal paste allows the gaps to be filled and better results to be obtained.

A thermocouple can be used if you wish to test specific points on the HSF for variance, which can indicate a poor performing or bad/damaged HSF.

Variance testing

Variance testing

Probing areas

The probes need to be cleaned and thermal paste used for every test.

Insertion of thermocouples should be done before adding water.

Using water as a heat transfer medium allows for more control of environmental factors that are otherwise left unchecked.

1. Humidity is controlled and maximized
2. Temperatures are controlled (as long as air movement is eliminated)
3. Air density is affected but will not be a factor that can be readily measured.

A control thermocouple (black) is used to monitor the base temperature.

1-2mm of water needs to be above the plate.

Using water will allow for repeatability in testing. This allows the temperatures to be easily stabilized and the maximum temperature will usually be in a predictable range; thus allowing for data sets to be formulated. After a point, head to head tests will no longer be necessary.

Keeping the meters on during the heating process can help identify trends in HSF units and also identify potential problems.

If only one unit is to be the focus, then a probe can be affixed to the HSF itself.

Testing temperature scaling and humidity is a necessity as they will work together to give a more controlled testing environment.

Testing room and zone temperatures is helpful if a database is to be made for comparison.

Bring up the temperature and humidity

The air temperatures in the test zone should stabilize and be maintainable and repeatable.

Using a humidity of 90-100% in the testing zone will help better control temperature for dependable and repeatable results.

Though the temperatures should remain uniform, there is no guarantee. ALWAYS CHECK TEMPERATURES AT MORE THAN ONE POINT!

Water temperature variance test point #1.

Water temperature variance test point 2

Video of fan on a cool down run.

Testing:

• Although a passive test, the process of heating up the HSF shows the ability to absorb and dissipate heat with no fan assistance.
• Variance testing will show the HSF’s ability to evenly spread it’s heat (this is best done with the fan off), which is critical for the HSF to respond to rapid changes in heat output. If there is a large variance between the closest point to the CPU and the furthest point away from it, then the HSF generally will not deal well with rapid heat output changes or the high heat output from overclocking.
• Testing of heat pipe efficiency is similar to standard variance testing. Testing the heat pipe at the points closest to and the furthest from the CPU will show the efficiency of the heat pipes.
• Building on the heat pipe test, a heat pipe to fin variance test shows the efficiency of the bond between the two materials/components of the HSF. This test shows design weaknesses and may show manufacturing flaws that show up from time to time in production runs. The causes for this are dependent on many factors, and if a HSF is found to be poorly made, the manufacturer should be contacted so that it can be corrected. It is never the intent of a major manufacturer to sell a bad product. If it is found to be a poor design then the tester or reviewer has little choice, a spade is a spade and a bad product should be shown for what it is.
• The fan on test shows which HSF is more capable of dispersing heat into the surrounding environment.

There are many other types of tests that can be done with an out of the box setup. The testing above is just a start.

Data collection: Keeping track of information allows the tester to build a database of results. By studying the variances, from run to run, choose a control heat sink to work with as a standard for comparison; a benchmark of sorts. The best way to record and store the information is with a meter that will log the information and allow output in a standard form that can be used in something like Excel or Open Office.

Obtaining a testing pan and plate: Most of these items are easy to acquire, save the box or pan. Local fabrication shops usually have plenty of scrap around and will usually sell it at a discount rate. If you are a product tester, the shop may cut you a break for a little free advertising in your review/blog, or you can part with the ~ $70 – $200 and just have it made.

That is all for now. Feel free to comment or ask questions and I will be happy to help in any way that I can.

First off, I’d like to make sure you know what you’re going to get from this review. This isn’t going to be your run of the mill motherboard review where I ramble about the number of USB and SATA ports and run meaningless tests comparing motherboards and drawing conclusions from the tiny differences between boards. First I’m going to briefly discuss the features and layout of the board keeping in mind my point of view as an overclocker. Next I’ll show some results with the board and discuss how they compare to competing boards with a focus on clock for clock efficiency in the benchmarks used by HWBot.org. Additionally I’ll be discussing the overall experience or using the board including a few subzero sessions.

Gigabyte’s X58A UD9 is many things, it’s Gigabyte’s flagship X58 based board, it supports Quad-SLI and CrossfireX, and has USB 3.0 and SATA 6. Oh, by the way, it’s $700 on Newegg. To be honest, I have trouble imagining a single socket X58 board that could possibly be worth $700 when the next highest priced board is right around $500 and has a similar feature set with the exception of USB 3.0 and SATA 6. Are USB 3.0 and SATA really worth $200? They certainly aren’t to me, and I suspect that many others feel similarly.

Features
As this is Gigabyte’s flagship Intel based board it has just about every feature you could imagine for a motherboard. USB 3.0 as well as SATA 6 and a pair of eSATA ports are included to cover all of your current and future storage needs.

The rear I/O Pannel has everything that is expected on a high-end board. Personally, I appreciated the eSATA/USB ports as they allowed greater flexibility. At this point, having a pair of PS2 ports seems a bit over the top and I would prefer to see that reduced down to one that worked for either keyboard or mouse.

Additionally, the board includes the Nvidia chips “necessary” to enable Quad SLI. In order to make this as easy as possible the board includes a full 7 PCI-Express 16x slots.

While very handy for running multiple GPUs, this is annoying for people who would like to use a PCI post card or sound card. Also included on the board is a two digit POST code display to make diagnosing boot issues easier which is critical when overclocking.

If you are someone who cares about all the minor features of the board I’ll point you over to Gigabyte’s product page for the board as it does a solid job of discussing the boards features in more detail.

Layout
First the obvious, the UD9 is larger than your typical motherboard; it is both taller and wider. The width really isn’t much of an issue, as it will fit comfortably in to any case which accepts E-ATX motherboards. The height is more of an issue as it prevents the board from fitting into cases that have only 7 expansion slots. The UD9 also has two 8-pin EPS12V connectors to ensure that the CPU provided all the power is needs. While I do appreciate this, the placement is less than ideal as it is a bit of hassle to remove the power supply connectors once they have been connected.

Right above the PCI-Express slots and at the bottom of the board, a pair of 4-pin drive connectors are included to guarantee that there is enough power for the board when running multi-GPU setups.

Similar to other high-end boards the UD9 includes both power and reset buttons on board to make using the board on an open test bench somewhat easier. While I can’t really complain about this, it did bug me a bit during testing, the size difference between the power and reset buttons is a bit jarring and does make the reset button a bit hard to hit without looking for it.

Additionally, Gigabyte includes an extra heatsink that screws onto the top of the northbridge heatsink to provide extra northbridge cooling for those that will be sticking to air cooling for the board. Also included is a waterblock that cools the northbridge and allows anyone who already has a water cooling loop to cool the northbridge easily. All of this extra cooling that is included would be great if it weren’t for one thing. Both the waterblock and the extra heatsink attach to a piece of metal that attaches to fins which attach to another metal base which finally contacts the X58 northbridge. Does anyone else see the problem here? There are Fins between the northbridge and the waterblock.

Fins are meant to dissipate heat not transfer it, as a result both the extra air heatsink and the waterblock have little effect on northbridge temperatures. After seeing this I proceeded to do all of my testing with either the waterblock or extra heatsink. Throughout the course of testing the northbridge temperature never exceeded 45 degrees Celsius, which is impressively low especially compared to some of the other high-end X58 based boards. I’m going to sum up the UD9 heatisnk situation with this, if you find that your having problems with your northbridge running too hot, odds are, you’re doing something wrong.

The CPU socket area is fairly typical, we see Gigabyte’s 24 phase power delivery system and well, everything else is fairly typical of X58 boards. The mosfet cooling around the socket is a nice height as is did not interfere with any of the cooling methods we tested including the Prolimatech Megahalems and the single stage phase change cooler which can be tough to mount on some boards.

The one thing I feel is worth mentioning from an overclocking point of view is that the area around the socket is relatively crowded which makes insulating the board for subzero runs a bit of a challenge.

Finally, the one thing that I is missing from the board is a set of voltage measuring points as to be able to measure the actual voltage that components are receiving. This has become standard on overclocking oriented boards and I feel that it is a significant omission. Ironically enough, the lack of measuring points hits especially hard as the voltage set in BIOS and the actual voltage differed significantly most of the time. This left me having ask around (thanks Jody) to find measure points which were fairly inconvenient (behind the CPU socket.)

Test Setup

Motherboard: Gigabyte X58A-UD9
Processor: Intel Core i7 980X Retail
Cooling: Single stage phase change, Kingpin Cooling F1EE + LN2
Memory: Corsair Dominator GT 2000C7
Video Card: Gigabyte GTX 480
Power Supply: Antec TPQ1200
Hard Drive: OCZ Vertex and Agility SSDs

A few notes about the UD9 and its BIOS
When I received the board it had the F1 bios, in this state is couldn’t clock memory to save it’s life, multiple kits, multiple CPUs and it still would only run 2000 MHz with 8-9-8-x or looser timings. Thankfully, this issue was fixed in F2 and later BIOSes and is no longer an issue as the UD9 now nearly identical to other high-end boards in terms of memory performance.

Results

(click for full screenshot)

All of the above results were achieved using the single stage phase change cooling unit which runs between -30C and -40C depending on the benchmark. Keeping this in mind, I’m happy with the results as the scores are all right around where they should be for a high-end board. The fact that Gigabyte has manged to keep their efficiency very close to that of boards that do not have NF200s while having two on board is impressive in my mind as most boards with NF200s on board take a slight performance hit in single card tests due to the added latency.

Now on to my favorite bench, low clock testing of SuperPi 32M. If I had to pick an area where the UD9 stood out, this would be it. Throughout testing, I was able to run 32M with my RTL values at least 1-2 settings tighter than on the E760 Classified. As a result, the UD9 enjoys a slight clock for clock advantage over the E760 classified in my testing. This allowed me to achieve a new personal best for lowest frequency needed to reach a sub 7 minute 32M run.

Click for full screenshot

This final result required liquid nitrogen cooling to achieve, and while not the greatest score overall, the clock for clock efficiency demonstrates what is possible with a better CPU.

Overall, the Gigabyte X58A-UD9 proved itself to be a solid, dependable board that never gave us any problems other than the initial memory struggles. A solid feature set, combined with well thought out layout and better efficiency than other boards make for a very respectable flagship board. Regardless, in good conscience I can’t recommend it at the $700 price point it currently occupies. It’s a great board but even in my efficiency oriented mind, the slightly better efficiency isn’t worth anywhere near the $200 extra it costs. If Gigabyte can get the price under control and bring it back into the realm of “reason”, say under $550, the UD9 will prove a very compelling choice for enthusiasts and overclockers alike.

Upon plugging the key in, I was greeted by a series of statements to complete and the option to generate a passcode. After completing the statements, I generated a passcode, removed the key from the computer and opened the phase 2 envelop. Phase 2 required placing the key with the passcode into the USB slot on the large case, pressing a button on the case and hoping I generated the correct passcode.

Luckily, I did generate the correct passcode and the case was now unlocked. When I opened the case, I could not believe what was inside: an Intel Core i7-875k, an IntelDP55SB Extreme Series, and two 4Gb kits of Patriot Viper II Series, Sector 5 Edition PC3-19200 (2400Mhz)

That brings us to phase three of the mission, using this unlocked version of Intel’s ultimate smart performer, Core i7.

The setup:

i7-875k
8GB PC3-19200*
Intel DP55SB
EVGA GTX 260 c216 (600/1458/1000, core/sp/mem)*
160GB Western Digital Caviar SE *OCZ ModXstream 700w*
Cooler Master Hyper 212+ with two Cooler Master R4-C2R-20AC-GP in push/pull configuration.
Win7 Pro x64*

*For comparison, I used a Core i7 920 (2.66Ghz) on an EVGA 3x SLI (E758) board along with these components.

Although a vital part of any computer, the CPU heat sink was not included in the case. I opted for this setup for two reasons, the first being that I could run out to MicroCenter and pick up the Hyper 212+ and two extra high CFM, low DB fans for a total of $30, and the second being that the Hyper 212+ cools like a beast. Originally, I had planned on liquid cooling, but after I got an 1156 retention bracket for my block, my pump died so I stuck with this setup throughout my testing.

A video overview of the unlocking portion of the mission:

Before taking a look at the performance, let’s look at the features of the i7-875k. The i7-875k sports 4 physical cores, 8 logical via Intel Hyper-Threading @ 2.93Ghz, 3.60Ghz with Turbo Boost enabled and 8Mb Smart Cache. Intel Turbo Boost Technology, which can be controlled in BIOS, dynamically changes processor frequency when working under specified power and thermal limits in order to provide a smoother computing experience. Hyper-threading allows you to run a up to 8 threads simultaneously increasing your productivity and the integrated memory controller supports dual channel DDR3 memory. This gem sure packs a powerhouse in a tiny package.

The “K” in the model number indicates that the processor is unlocked. What this means is that the processor has unlocked Turbo Boost multipliers, allowing for quick and easy overclocking as well as unlocked voltage and memory frequency. Pairing an unlocked processor with the Intel DP55Sb motherboard allows for full control of your computing experience. The highly tunable BIOS let you easily take advantage of unlocked multipliers, and overclock like mad.

On to the stressing, benching and overclocking.

A series of tests were ran on both the i7 920 and 875k at both stock speeds and at 4.0Ghz for comparison purposes. All test suites were left on stock settings.

3DMark Vantage
A standard in benchmarking. PhysX was left on as both processors were being tested with the same GTX 260 at the same speeds.

The 875k outscores the 920 at stock speeds. While they have the same total score at 4.0Ghz, the 875k has a higher CPU score.

Maxon Cinebench R11.5
The newest release of the popular Cinebench benchmarking suite which simulates what results you can expect using Maxon’s Cinema 4D suite. Great for multi-core CPU testing.

The 875k out performs the 920 at stock, and performs nearly as well at 4.0Ghz.

Fritz Chess
Testing how fast the CPU can calculate chess moves using a real chess game engine. Fully supports multi-core processors.

The 875k beats out the 920 at both stock speeds and 4.0Ghz.

Hyper Pi
Another favorite amongst overclockers and benchmarkers. Calculates how quickly the CPU can calculate Pi the 1m digits.

Although faster at stock speeds, the 875k is slower to calculate at 4.0Ghz.

POV Ray
Free CPU based ray tracing software. It has a built in benchmark for painless testing.

875k takes the cake in both cases.

ScienceMark
A cluster of real world, rather than synthetic, tests. Composite score is compared.

At stock speeds, the 875k scores significantly higher than the 920. At 4.0Ghz, the 920 marginally beats the 875k.

SiSoft Sandra
Although Sandra has a slew of synthetic tests, only a handful of the CPU tests were ran.

At stock, the 875k scores better in all tests, but it’s a toss up at 4.0Ghz.

Folding@Home
Real world folding results, running -smp 7 (A3 units) on the native windows client.

Although points vary by work unit, the A3 units all produce approximately the same points per day, give or take a few hundred. The 875k is the clear winner at stock speeds, but the 4.0Ghz crown is up for grabs.

Games
Games were ran at 1920×1080, and game preset high settings.

World in Conflict

Battlefield Bad Company 2

Gaming is a toss up, both the 920 and the 875k perform very well. 875K better in WIC, 920 better in BFBC2.

The performance of the i7-875k chip is impressive; it scores close to, or better than, the i7 920 in most tests and a games, but consumes much less power with a TDP of 95w and a max of 89 amps drawn. Since this in an unlocked chip, both the TDP max amperage can be changed in BIOS that support it. To me, that makes the 875k a clear winner.

Now for what everyone wants to see, overclocking these new i7-875k chips.

Here are two CPU-Z screen shots at stock speeds and default BIOS settings. These chips have a base clock of 133Mhz and multipliers of 9-22, 24 in turbo mode:

To show how easy it is to overclock this chip, let’s start with a video.

Okay, that was pretty good, but I know this chip can do better. Now, there are four different turbo multipliers, each corresponds to how many cores are being used. So if you want to hit different speeds or save power while using 1, 2, 3 or 4 cores you can. For my testing, I set all four multipliers the same to ensure I hit the speed I was looking for.

One thing to note, memory frequency is linked and synced with BClk, so if you want a higher RAM frequency, you will need to use a higher BClk, not a higher multiplier.

On to the overclocking fun.

First I decided I was going to keep the multipliers at the default 24 and just increase the base clock frequency. Increasing BClk to 180 yields a core speed of 4.325Ghz at 1.376 volts, not too bad on air!

How about just increasing the UNLOCKED multipliers? Well, I cheated a little on this one. I wanted to hit at least 4.3Ghz, but I was having trouble high multipliers, so I had to increase BClk by 2Mhz. Bumping up the multipliers to 32 and the BClk to 135 yields a clock speed of 4.324 @ 1.408volts.

My favorite method, increasing both BClk and unlocked multipliers. Setting the BClk at 162 and multipliers at 26 yields just over 4.2Ghz at 1.32 volts. With such low voltage, there is more overclocking headroom.

Considering these results were all on air, I am very impressed by this chip. It is, by far, the easiest processor I have overclocked. The unlocked multipliers really give it an edge over locked chips; having the option of mixing increased multipliers and base clocks provides and overall easier overclocking experience. Also note, overclocking varies from hardware to hardware, person to person. My experiences are not guaranteed reproducible.

Now that I have unlocked and overclocked, my mission has come to an end I can honestly say I love this processor. As a folder, I have been fond of the i7 920 for quite sometime now, but with the unlocked multipliers and power settings, I have found a new processor for my folding rig.

One thing that has not been mentioned yet, because it’s impossible to measure, is the overall smoothness of computing. For awhile, I have been noticing my 920 is a bit more jittery than I would like. A little lagging that is probably not that noticeable to most has really been bothering me, especially after switching between the 875k and the 920. The i7-875k is smooth as butter, I have not experienced any of the choppiness I have noticed with my 920.

All in all, the i7-875k is a keeper. I had been looking for a reason to move to the 1156 platform and now I have found it and couldn’t be happier.

Here’s your chance to get on the overclocking fun!

Intel has been kind enough to provide a similar set of hardware to give away to one lucky reader. It should be obvious what makes the i7-875k so special, but if you are unsure what it is, I will give you a hint. I have scrambled one word that describes the specialty of the i7-875k, you will have to unscramble it yourself, but it is easy! Here it is:

ueokcnld

Once you have it unscrambled, head over to the contest section of the forums for more details.

Disclaimer: Intel provided the i7-875k, DP55SB and kits of Patriot memory to be used in this review. They have also covered the cost of promotion of and prize for the contest in which one reader will win a similar package.

• Compatible with K-, J-, T- and E- thermocouples (others should work but these are the recommended types)
• User programmable offsets
• Internal memory stores 100 sets of temperature readings that can be transferred to PC software
• Data logging software for real time testing (good for working with fan and component placement and viewing their effects in real time)
• Ability to export data sets from software in .xls format to do comparative studies and graphing

The graph capabilities of the 72-7712 software are not phenomenal, it does however serve the purpose. Though dual software readout (T1 & T2) would be preferred; the logging capacity and decent feature set, as well as an Excel export feature make up for the software weaknesses.

Thermocouple 1 reading

Thermocouple 2 reading

Thermocouple 1 - thermocouple 2 reading. Temperature difference. This screen is most effective when trying to move case temperatures closer to ambient room temperature.

Example of exported data to .xls format

Thermal conductivity of the heat sink material is an important factor in air cooling. Copper and aluminum are the most widely used materials in PC HSF (heat sink & fan) construction. The properties of these two materials are critical to proper cooling of the processor.

The Chart below shows the thermal conductivity of materials for comparison. The only three that matter for this testing are aluminum, copper and air (water and the other items may be of interest to those who like to get a little wet).

:More information about thermal conductivity and conductive heat transfer:

Some simple ideas for improving the PC enthusiast experience:

Checking the case for hot spots.

Keeping your entire case as close to ambient is probably the most important thing that can be done to keep the HSF operating at its maximum efficiency. A heat sink can not lower temperatures below case ambient and will usually level out 4-12 degrees centigrade above case ambient no matter how much money is spent on it.

By identifying hot spots, proper fan placement can be made. Though these areas may not seem relevant to CPU cooling; they are. Air circulating throughout the case creates eddies, (a current of air running contrary to the main current; especially: a circular current : whirlpool) which in turn, remain hot and by cross circulation make  air circulating around them heat up.

Working in a similar fashion to the eddy, dead zones (hot area where there is no mechanical air circulation) may seem harmless, it is critical to circulate or eliminate this air to alleviate convection (heat transfer in a gas by the circulation of currents from one region to another). For dead zones a fan may not be an option and directed air may be needed. If directed air is not possible then closing in/sectioning off this area may be the only option.

Knowing where the hot areas of the case are allows for fixes that otherwise would not be possible.

Testing for efficiency.

Methodology: Air can only dissipate a fixed amount of heat due to its low thermal conductivity. Having a material of higher thermal conductivity does not always mean better temperatures, but it does allow a potential for lower temperatures, depending on other contributing factors. Testing the two most common heat sink materials to see these differences helps gain an understanding of what the conductivity numbers really mean.

Copper and Aluminum heat sinks tested for conductivity.

Copper; 56.8 seconds to reach maximum efficiency with a variance of 3.9 degrees centigrade

Aluminum 59.8 seconds to reach maximum efficiency with a variance of 7.9 degrees centigrade

This is the point where temperatures stabilize and heat is dispersed through natural convection. This is not a scientific test as the blocks were not exactly the same and some variables were omitted. What it does show is that copper will transfer heat faster and more evenly.

A double boiler is used to allow for better temperature control

Test equipment and stop watch used (phone) for testing. A Tenma 72-8540 is used as a control.

The copper and aluminum heat sinks used for the test

A two minute test of both materials (copper and aluminum) showed a 3.7 degree centigrade variance, copper being hotter (this is good, it means it will draw that much more heat to be dissipated). It must be taken into consideration that these heat sinks did not have a fan and the variance would have been lower during operation.

The results of this test correlate directly to the previous test results.

Testing your Heat Sink and Fan assembly

Using an Arctic Cooling AF64 PRO

If the HSF is not equalizing temperatures within a reasonable variance or running 10+ degrees above ambient case temperature (check the temperature at the intake area of the HSF to eliminate the possibility of a hot spot causing the problem) then a re-seat of the HSF may be needed and possibly a replacement HSF of higher quality may be in order.

Using information gathered with a good temperature meter will help guide the process of lowering case temperatures and in turn allow for a cooler processor, memory and hard disk drive.

Shots of the 72-7712

All display elements

Temperature readout screen

Variance screen

Setup: Offset adjustment screen

Front view of meter showing controls

Conclusion

Using a dual probe temperature meter with capabilities comparable to the 72-7712 is a definite step up from the volt meter type single probe units that were used in the past. With the data logging capabilities and other features available with this unit it is much easier to maximize case cooling and potentially gain a few hundred MHz from a heat limited overclock.

With acceptable quality, useful software and features the 72-7712 makes an excellent addition to the tool box of the overclocker or small PC mod shop.

]]> http://www.techreaction.net/2010/06/01/tenma-72-7712-dual-chanel-temp-probe-what-happens-with-tempratures-inside-a-pc/feed/ 4 http://www.techreaction.net/2010/05/31/blog-kingston-hyperx-ddr3-%e2%80%98lovo%e2%80%99-oc-testing/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=blog-kingston-hyperx-ddr3-%25e2%2580%2598lovo%25e2%2580%2599-oc-testing http://www.techreaction.net/2010/05/31/blog-kingston-hyperx-ddr3-%e2%80%98lovo%e2%80%99-oc-testing/#comments Mon, 31 May 2010 13:47:50 +0000 wez http://www.techreaction.net/?p=6889 Kingston HyperX DDR3 ‘LoVo’ OC testing

Just a quick look at a memory kit from Kingston, namely a set from their somewhat new ‘LoVo’ series. Judging by the name its a low voltage kit, so not a kit directly aimed at the enthusiast market. But word has it they might be worth a look after all!

According to their site, Kingston currently offers three versions of their ‘LoVo’ kits, 1333, 1600 and 1866 MHz. But there also seem to be an 1800 MHz kit listed at some shops, possible a replacement for the 1866 model? Either way, all share the same timings of 9-9-9-27 with recommended voltage ranging from 1.25 to 1.35v. And currently only available in 2×2 Gb dual channel kits.

The 1866 MHz kit is what I’ll mess around with today, part number is KHX1866C9D3LK2/4GX
This kit comes with two preset XMP profiles:

- Low Voltage 1866 MHz 9-9-9-27 @ 1.35v
- Ultra-Low Voltage 1600 MHz 9-9-9-27 @ 1.25v

Although for some reason the 1600 MHz profile didn’t get recognized properly. Now this could very well be a software issue on my part, but thought I’d at least give it a mention.

The sticks come with Kingston’s standard HyperX heat spreader, commonly used in a lot of their kits. But one thing is new, and that is the color!

Hardware & Software

- Gigabyte GA-MA790FXT-UD5P (BIOS f8h)
- AMD Phenom II x6 1090T
- Kingston HyperX LoVo 1866 MHz 2×2Gb (KHX1866C9D3LK2/4GX)
- ATI Radeon HD5870 1Gb
- Chieftec 1200G-DF

- Windows 7 Ultimate x64
- Prime95, Memtest, SuperPi, CPUz and Easytune

Not the most optimal platform to test high speed memory on. And low voltage testing is also out of the question as 1.6v is the lowest this board allows me to set. But ignoring that, let’s see what they can do!

These settings will all run Prime95 and Memtest for a few hours without any hiccup, so I’d call them stable.

Starting at 1.60v, 1624MHz

1.65v, 1688MHz

1.70v, 1712MHz

1.75v, 1720MHz

Voltage scaling beyond ~1.70v is pretty limited, although small gains are still there. Also, relaxing timings didn’t allow for much higher clocks, so I left those screens out on purpose.
Either way I think it’s safe to say that these sticks are capable of much higher clocks, but simply put the motherboard is holding them back. Hopefully I get a chance to test them out on a 890FX board in the near future, and I’ll be sure to post an follow up when I do.

And just for the sake of it, this is the limit for passing a SuperPI 32M run.