Intel 925X/915: Chipset Performance & DDR2
by Wesley Fink on June 19, 2004 3:01 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Final Words
It was hard to resist being glib and titling this article, "Much Ado about Very Little". That feeling of disappointment comes from seeing so much new technology introduced all at once, and then finding out the real performance benefit is extremely small - if it exists at all. If Intel wants us to turn our computer world upside down, there should be a real tangible benefit to the bucks we are expected to spend. Unfortunately, that performance advantage is pretty hard to find - at least for now. There are certainly a few gems in the total package, but if you're looking for a big performance advantage it just isn't there.The feature side of the equation is a lot easier to handle, as Intel has lavished all the features a techie could dream about on the new chipsets. High-Definition audio, Matrix RAID, a new bus with a bright future, and an 8GB per second bidirectional graphics slot are a few of those features that come to mind. Those new features do come with a price, however. You are also asked basically to give up IDE hard drives and also start the transition to SATA optical devices. This will be an easier task for some than for others.
There is also the question of future advantage. It appears that all these new technologies would set you up well for the future, but frankly, we're not absolutely sure that is the case. Time and the marketplace will answer this question better than any crystal-balling, and seeing where other manufacturers and the marketplace take these new technologies will soon provide a clearer picture of what will win - and what won't. There is no doubt that Intel wields enormous clout in the marketplace, but that clout did not make Rambus a winner for Intel. If prices for the new Intel vision of a PC are high and performance gains remain small, directions can change quickly again.
There were a few real surprises in the new boards and chipsets. The 925X is the Enthusiast part, and it is clearly the fastest of the new chipsets. We were surprised, however, to find the advantage over the mainstream 915 chipset was only 1% to 3%. 925X also must use DDR2 memory, which can make that 1% to 3% performance advantage very costly at current DDR2 prices. 915 will come from some vendors with DDR2, but there will also be a huge selection of DDR 915 boards, at least until DDR2 prices drop to more comparable levels with DDR.
We also clearly saw in our performance tests that a current Intel 875 motherboard, running fast DDR memory and a Northwood processor, was just as fast as a 925X running a Prescott at the same speed. This is not really a failing on the part of the new chipsets, though, as it indicates real progress in Prescott development. When Prescott was first introduced, it was a much poorer performer than Northwood. The fact that it is now competitive with Northwood using all these new technologies indicates a lot of progress has been made.
Last, we looked at DDR and DDR2 on the 915 chipset. We saw that DDR is just as fast as DDR2 on the 915 boards, given the current state of DDR2. If you are looking for a new Intel motherboard, don't hesitate to choose a 915 with DDR support because there really isn't a performance penalty. As prices drop and timings get faster for DDR2, then DDR2 will be a better choice.
There is a lot to like in all the new features and technologies that Intel has introduced with the new chipsets. We will be covering these new features in more detail in future reviews. We just wish that there were more real performance gains to get excited about. This is nothing new for Intel, and they are a company that always seems to have plans down the road that suddenly makes it all fall into place. Be sure to read the rest of the story, which compares the new Intel processors and takes a closer look at PCIe graphics and Intel's new integrated graphics solution.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
57 Comments
View All Comments
Cygni - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
The three big "must upgrades", DDR2, BTX, and PCIe will offer little to no reason for people to switch over. This is one of those rare times where I say go ahead and spend. There really isnt anything much better on the immediate horizon. Get a nice high end P4 or A64 setup with the nicest vid card you can find and enjoy. All the new tech is useless.On the 925/915 itself, the high quality audio, upped integrated graphics, and 4 SATA ports are all good things for sure. Im waiting to see how the audio and graphics perform. Could be a future super-platform for low end computers.
JustAnAverageGuy - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
#4You're probably right.
Would have been a much fairer comparison had they used the same CPU.
A Northwood on 875
vs a
Prescott on 925
hardly compares the chipsets.
A prescott on 875
vs a
Prescott on 925
probably would have been a bit more objective.
JustAnAverageGuy - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
Is that a typo on page 19?Second graph
http://www.anandtech.com/chipsets/showdoc.html?i=2...
rjm55 - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
I'm sure Intel won't like this review, but it exactly the reason I keep coming back to Anandtech to see what's really going on in computers. Thanks for asking the hard questions, and reporting the answers honestly!You just saved me a lot of disappointment on my next upgrade - which will now be an Athlon 64.
thatsright - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
#8, GhandiInstinctDude!!! You need to get out a bit more man!
overclockingoodness - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
Not to mention the fact that with practically no performance differences, Intel is trying to change the whole hardware industry. It is very hard to keep up with technologies these days, but it's annoying when the performance gains are minimal.overclockingoodness - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
So let's see what we have here...1. AMD is better in performance wise than Intel's new chipsets and LGA775 processor, however, the difference is not that big.
2. There isn't a much difference between PCIe and AGP graphics cards (even though it is not tested yet), but one would suspect the performance difference to be rather minimal.
3. 875P chipset is better than Grantsdale and Alderwood chipsets.
4. DDR "I" is better than DDR II.
Basically, all the new technologies have failed as far as the performance results are concerned. People should now go with AMD64 systems. If you still want to stay with Intel, it is better to predict that a good high-end 875P system will still be better for another 6 months, if not more. Secondly, people shouldn't jump on the new hardware as soon as it comes out. Wait for the new technologies to mature. And if you really want to jump bandwagon of new technologies, purchase a board that supports both DDR2 and DDR memory modules, choose DDR modules and save some money as DDR 2 modules are heavily priced. However, you will have to jump the PCIe graphics bandwagon, but I guess you win some and lose some.
Is it me or is Intel not holding up that well this year? Maybe this is a bad year for them. Research reports show that Intel will remain at the top but AMD will gain more market shares this year, which is expected.
Did I missed something or am I pretty much on the right ball?
overclockingoodness - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
medfly - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
the thing that i was most dissapointed in, is the fact that intel feels they need to shaft non sata users by only providing one pata channel. Intel's anti consumer attitude "you'll upgrade when we tell you to" with constantly changing sockets, crippled chipsets (remember how 815 only supported 512 megs ram when the older 440bx did 2 gigs of ram in an attempt to force people to the extremely expensive (and slow) P4 platform at the time), will only force more and more of the white box and DIY market to amd.GhandiInstinct - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
This article has let me down completely. I have been looking forward to this new technology for my new system build. To see the benchmarks and the virtual lack of performance gains has hit me like a bullet.A novice computer builder hears "3.6ghz, PCI-E, DDR2, ICH6" and goes insane with happiness.
I beg the question, has Intel lost its mojo? Trying to redfine the computer world by exhibiting hardware that barely exceeds the preceeding hardware? What is a man to do?
I should admit, I am a hyper-threading fanatic. But Since A64 beat Intel in everything, I guess "hyper-transport" is what I'll settle with.
The message is clear, my life is over....