performance of 965 vs 975x

[tech960]

It seems I have read conflicting information on which chipset is faster. Can anyone say for certain which is the better conroe option? I don't plan to run sly mode. I would think go with the newer 965 as it has a new memory controller. Any opinions?

 

[markymoo]

turns out that the 975x is a less powerful chipset then the 965. the 965 uses less cpu resources. theres little difference but the 965 can be overclocked further due to looser timings so in effect its faster in the end due to higher fsb. the differences is minor 975 supporting multi GPU solutions namely crossfire, and the 965 not supporting multi-gpu. the 965 is stripped down version of 975. 965 was to replace the 915 boards while 975 the 875.

The 965 chipset unleashes the full potential of the Conroe?s power saving features and monitors the 5 thermostats on the Core 2 Duos. I hear it will temporally boost the performance of the chip based on these readings.

so because of the limitations of the memory timings and that the memory needs to be kept upto the speed of the fsb this makes the 965 alot better for speed. which we now see that more as improved bios come out for the 965.

http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2671
http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2797&p=2

The only reason 975 beats 965 in some tests is because it been out alot longer and bios have come about. The 965 chipset is still early and will get better(faster) in time. its already showing it can have higher fsb out of the box.

the speed differences are marginal.

 

[hans007]

well the 965 was supposed to replace the 945 actually. and the 975 replaced the 955. the 975 has been out a while though, and there will likely be a faster one eventually (probably one with official 1333bus support if the quad cores are 1333 bus).

the 965 i think from benchmarks i've seen is more or less the same speed. and its a newer design (though i've read it actually uses more power than the older 945). it also doesnt have any ATA ports, so all o fthem have to have an add on chip, which the ic7 equipped 975s dont need.

 

[lopri]

Originally posted by: markymoo
..turns out that the 975x is a less powerful chipset then the 965..

..The only reason 975 beats 965 in some tests is because it been out alot longer and bios have come about...

the speed differences are marginal..

How do you keep your argument's integrity (I'm not sure what your argument is about, to be honest), with so many self-conflicting claims on every other line?

 

[markymoo]

@lopri
i have been supportive of the 965 throughout the reply. i said in some review tests the 975 has been faster due to the maturity of the bios. the 965 has some issues still and later bios will improve the 965 further.

the speed differences between them are marginal at the same fsb same hardware. theres going to be little difference in speed and they both stable boards.

its more important you look at the features of the board and devices you be attaching than speed as its not even 5% difference.

at end of the day you cant oc a 975 as far as a 965 so on that front the 965 will leave the 975 far behind on fsb and memory bandwidth. if you want lots of features then get the 975 but thats not about speed is it.but you might want to not oc i dont know.

the point i was making is if you dont need the features, cosmetics of the 975 then stick with the 965 as it will get better and better.

anyway if the ati rd600 chipset is the monster it claims then it will annihilate p5b p5wdh aw9dmax which i believe it has already reached 530fsb out of the box. with a 1333+ fsb and a better memory controller not to mention faster pci-eand not only that it be a decent price alot cheaper than intel chipsets so worth the upgrade for sure.

google p5wdh vs. p5b same spec benchmarks to see the exact details. you wont always see a pattern 1 winning outright over the other.

also it also depends which 975 board you mean. some 975 can beat some 965 and some 965 can beat some 975. like i said the differences are slight. certain calculations the 975 wins on and 965 wins on others.

http://www.bit-tech.net/content_images/...deluxe_wifi_ap_edn/adobe-photoshop.png
http://www.bit-tech.net/content_images/..._wifi_ap_edn/winrar-large-compress.png
http://www.bit-tech.net/content_images/..._wifi_ap_edn/winrar-small-compress.png
http://www.bit-tech.net/content_images/...b_deluxe_wifi_ap_edn/Xvid-encoding.png
http://www.bit-tech.net/content_images/...uxe_wifi_ap_edn/mp3-encoding-intel.png

if you going to run either 975 or 965 at its default speed then theres little difference. but it be like buying a porsche and driving it at 30. every motherboard review you read theres now always a overclocking review. the p5b can be pushed further on auto settings and still remain stable.

now do you see why i sound conflicting. its horses for courses.

 

[430752]

I think Markymoo is about right on this, at the present time, but with some disagreement. What I mean is that the questioning of his/her argument was unfair as s/he said it objectively enough to get the idea without hyperbole. I've myself noticed that the 965 chipset boards seem to be going quicker, faster (err.... seem to be performing faster more quickly as in out of the box/less work). Still, I think I'm going with the 975x since I've read elsewhere that it isn't so much as the 965 chipset being better, but rather that the is easier to uncork. I've heard the 975x will be the ultimate champ once fully uncorked. That's why intel gave it the "x", as in 975x, designation, while the 965 gets p or g, as in pedestrian or gutless. (okay, they do not stand for pedestrian or gutless, but it sounds good!). Of course, I have no hard data to back this up about 975x>p/g965, just stuff I've been reading.

to each their own.

curt j.

 

[lopri]

Sorry I was drunk. (for real)

 

[yacoub]

"it's like buying a Porsche and driving it 30mph"

Okay so which board is the Civic? The affordable, reliable board that has all the necessary features but isn't overpriced like a luxury board?

I've yet to find it, honestly.

The Intel P965 board turned out to be a flakey, picky POS.

 

[lopri]

I once again realize that I should never write when I'm under the influence but then again I didn't even remember that i wrote my first reply in this thread until I clicked the "My Forum" tab. I more or less agree with the OP's assessment on 975X vs P965. Basically what I don't like about P965 as of now is the immature BIOS, which for sure will change over time. (But I won't be a Gunnea-pig!)

Advantage 975X - Predictable (Easier-to-control) performance including OC, nicer feature set
Advantage P965 - Higher clocking possibility due to smaller manufacturing process, Better 3D performance (It seems like Intel tweaked the PCI-E configuration)

However the way chipset straps work is the same on 975X and P965. So unless/even though you go for small(er) multiplier and shoot for something like 600FSB, which is not very practical even after considering the higher clocking potential of P965, there would be little to no bandwidth advantage due to higher FSB.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: yacoub
"it's like buying a Porsche and driving it 30mph"

Okay so which board is the Civic? The affordable, reliable board that has all the necessary features but isn't overpriced like a luxury board?

I've yet to find it, honestly.

The Intel P965 board turned out to be a flakey, picky POS.

Sure it did...there's about a hundred people on these forums running fine with DS3/DS4/DQ6/P5B Deluxe etc