• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

After 1.5 years of introduction.. Still the King

lopri

lopri

Elite Member
With so many boards coming out in the market under various chipsets, none of the chipset can't compete with it. And 975X has been out for over a year and a half.. While there have been new chipset launches with blings.. Do they matter?

I'm going to write about what I've observed for the next few days. (If I can, that is.. 🙁 )


Not a word about OC'ing or CPUs ... seems destined for MBs
-CPU Moderator apoppin
 
Well, the 975X was their 'top dog' for the time, and they didn't plan to release its successor 'till now ( X38 ).
While the 975X has the best performance clock per clock, it still has it's own limitations.
With a Core 2 Duo and depending on your luck ( how good NB you 'picked' ) & the voltage applied to it you are FSB limited at tops 510MHz ( 510MHz FSB with 975X is more than a rare gem, not stable, and requires a lot of Vnb { Northbridge voltage } ), stable FSB range = 410MHz - 490MHz [ with the average being 440MHz ]
With a Core 2 Quad you are having a FSB limit way earlier, and without extra mods ( Vgtl ) you won't pass 300MHz FSB.
The limitations don't stop here, but apply to the memory ( RAM ) as well.Sticks that can do DDR2-1250 stable with a P965/P35/nF680i/RD600 can't pass ~DDR2-1050 - DDR2-1100 on a 975X board.

That's my additions for now 😉
 
Originally posted by: BenchZowner
Well, the 975X was their 'top dog' for the time, and they didn't plan to release its successor 'till now ( X38 ).
While the 975X has the best performance clock per clock, it still has it's own limitations.
With a Core 2 Duo and depending on your luck ( how good NB you 'picked' ) & the voltage applied to it you are FSB limited at tops 510MHz ( 510MHz FSB with 975X is more than a rare gem, not stable, and requires a lot of Vnb { Northbridge voltage } ), stable FSB range = 410MHz - 490MHz [ with the average being 440MHz ]
With a Core 2 Quad you are having a FSB limit way earlier, and without extra mods ( Vgtl ) you won't pass 300MHz FSB.
The limitations don't stop here, but apply to the memory ( RAM ) as well.Sticks that can do DDR2-1250 stable with a P965/P35/nF680i/RD600 can't pass ~DDR2-1050 - DDR2-1100 on a 975X board.

That's my additions for now 😉
Click to expand...

Reasons why I moved from my P5WDG2 WS Pro to an Asus P5K Deluxe!

My P5WDG2 would max out @ about 460mhz with a C2D. And RAM, I could never go beyond 1000mhz. And the "cold boot" from every 975X motherboard I had (Intel BadAxe, Gigabyte ???) is now gone with the P35.

 
Yes, but why do we raise the FSB and memory frequencies to begin with? Is it just for the sake of higher FSB and higher memory frequencies? The only thing that'd come close to 975X's performance clock per clock is highly tweaked (read: 1T) 680i, which could be a PITA. As per quad-overclocking, I agree with you guys. It might be too difficult compared to when performed on other chipsets.

I will try to back up my claims with data (have dealt with 975X, 680i, P965, P35), but my observations so far:

Advantage 975X:

1. Stable, stable, and STABLE
2. Proper IDE (PATA) support
3. Faster than any other chipset
4. Best Vista support (even for 64-bit. This I will talk more later)
5. Best memory performance including when all 4 slots are filled
6. Flexible PCI-E configuration

Orion, may I ask what CPU do you use for 460FSB+?

Below is an old pic of mine when I first purchased a P5W-DH. (@400FSB, which is a completely stable configuration under air-cooling, btw) When your CPU maxes out @3.20~3.60GHz, IMHO, there is no reason to lower multiplier and seek higher FSB.

http://img407.imageshack.us/my.php?image=975xde7.png
 
Originally posted by: lopri
Yes, but why do we raise the FSB and memory frequencies to begin with? Is it just for the sake of higher FSB and higher memory frequencies? The only thing that'd come close to 975X's performance clock per clock is highly tweaked (read: 1T) 680i, which could be a PITA. As per quad-overclocking, I agree with you guys. It might be too difficult compared to when performed on other chipsets.

I will try to back up my claims with data (have dealt with 975X, 680i, P965, P35), but my observations so far:

Advantage 975X:

1. Stable, stable, and STABLE
2. Proper IDE (PATA) support
3. Faster than any other chipset
4. Best Vista support (even for 64-bit. This I will talk more later)
5. Best memory performance including when all 4 slots are filled
6. Flexible PCI-E configuration

Orion, may I ask what CPU do you use for 460FSB+?
Click to expand...


With my old 975X board, I was using an E6600 capable of 4ghz+. On air, I once booted @ 4.2ghz and was able to keep a very stable 4ghz during the winter months.

About the Vista support for 975X, well, it is a "very old" chipset, so it better be properly supported by now.

Stability wise, the P35 has given me less crashes when overclocked than 975X. And the IDE support, well, it's about time that IDE stops being supported.

The one thing THAT I LIKED about the original Vista release, is that it was going to mark a big change in terms of hardware and performance. Old things were supposed to be out, and only newer, faster parts were going to be compatible.

I really don't care about the floppy, IDE drives, or old school mouse / keyboards components.

I do have to say, that my best super PI scores were acomplished with the 975X board!
 
Orion: Well you've got a very special CPU and yes I can understand the need of high FSB for such a CPU. But I'm sure you know that not everyone has a CPU that clocks to 4.0GHz+, as well as how straps work on Intel chipsets. If, say, you had a CPU with unlocked multiplier, you would agree that 13x307FSB under 800 strap is faster than 9x444FSB under 1333 strap. As a matter fact, my Bad Axe 2 did 450FSB under 1066 strap, so had I had a CPU that clocked to 4.0GHz I would have had it run 9x444FSB under 1066 strap and it'd surely beat any P965 or P35 with 1333, or even 1600 straps.

Originally posted by: orion23
And the IDE support, well, it's about time that IDE stops being supported.
Click to expand...
It's not that I like IDE to live forever - but rather the opposite. The problem is the boards utilizing P965/P35 boards aren't that spectacular with SATA configuration. For instance, attempting to build a RAID5 with 3 disks + 1 SATA CD-ROM with 4 SATA ports can be impossible on some boards. However on 975X, any kind of RAID (supported by 975X) is nearly hassle-free if you leave optical drives on IDE channel and use the SATA channel for hard disks. Plus other features that SATA technology should provide (such as NCQ) might not play well when optical disks and hard disks are mixed on current P965/P35 boards. This is what I'm pointing out - I'm not advocating the longevity of IDE.
 
One of my past observations I'd like to comment before I forget:

I was able to get better performance from 680i than 975X - but only when 2 sticks of DIMMs were used. (various tweaks, 1T, and whatnot) When all 4 slots were filled, even 1T performance of 680i couldn't beat 975X. But I do respect the engineering of NV - they created a memory controller that handles 8GB (4x2GB) of DDR2-800 flawlessly. I didn't get a chance to try 8GB out on 975X yet, though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top