Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Overclocking, Power And Heat

Asus And DFI: Core i7 Micro-ATX Motherboards Compared
By

Though available Core i7 processors are typically limited to around 220 MHz BCLK, a few select samples can at least exceed that limit. Extreme overclockers, especially though with sub-ambient cooling, will also try higher voltage levels than most of us would consider safe. Here’s what the two Micro ATX Core i7 motherboards offer in BIOS.

BIOS Frequency And Voltage Settings (For Overclocking)

 

Asus Rampage II
Gene

DFI LANParty Jr
X58-T3H6

CPU Base Clock

100-500 MHz (1 MHz)

133-250 MHz (1 MHz)

CPU Multiplier

Yes

Yes

DRAM Data Rates

BCLK x6 - x16 (x2)

BCLK x6 - x16 (x2)

PCIe Clock

100-200 MHz (1 MHz)

100-250 MHz (1 MHz)

CPU Vcore

0.85-2.50V (6.25mV)

1.00-2.00V (12.5mV)

Uncore Voltage

1.20-2.50V (6.25mV)

1.21-1.61V (10mV)

IOH Core

1.11-2.20V (13.25mV)

1.10-1.45V (50mV)

ICH Core

1.11-2.20V (13.25mV)

1.05-1.35V (100mV)

DRAM Voltage

1.51-2.50V (13.25mV)

1.455-2.40V (15mV)

CAS Latency

3-11 Cycles

1-11 Cycles

tRCD

3-10 Cycles

1-31 Cycles

tRP

3-10 Cycles

1-10 Cycles

tRAS

3-31 Cycles

1-31 Cycles


While the Rampage II Gene offers a broader range of Bclk and voltage settings, the LANParty Jr X58-T3H6’s BIOS limits still exceed the tolerable levels for available hardware.

The toughest test is to see how far each motherboard can stably push our Core i7 920 processor using the same voltage settings and timings. We used eight threads of Prime95 x64 to stress each configuration.

The Rampage II Gene beat the LANParty Jr X58-T3H6 in top clock speed at 1.45V core, but not by enough to consider a definitive victory. More significant is that both Micro-ATX motherboards proved more stable than the full-sized Asus P6T, invalidating myths about Micro-ATX incapacity.

A base clock of 220MHz could potentially take a Core i7 920 to 4.40 GHz, but only with a very good core and advanced cooling. A lower multiplier allowed us to bypass those special conditions to find a retail processor’s Bclk limit on each motherboard, just shy of the 220 MHz mark for both the LANParty Jr X58-T3H6 and Rampage II Gene. Both motherboards beat the full-sized P6T, again putting to rest notions about Micro ATX instability.

DFI wins the memory overclocking comparison. The second-place Rampage II Gene beats the full-sized P6T on average due to its much higher six-module results, but the P6T rises to the middle when only three modules are installed.

Asus alters the standard voltage level slightly in addition to its 0.20% default CPU overclock, but the increase in power is still somewhat surprising. Our most recent experience has shown that most motherboards typically fall between the LANParty Jr X58-T3H6 and Rampage II Gene in power consumption when using these components, so DFI deserves about half the credit for the significant disparity in power consumption.

In spite of its higher power consumption, the Rampage II Gene runs slightly cooler than LANParty Jr X58-T3H6.

Display all 41 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • 2 Hide
    IzzyCraft , May 29, 2009 6:32 AM
    Shame the DFI board didn't do better it help shut up people going where is the Rampage II gene in the Builders marathon.

    Although this review let me have a little more respect for the board I'm still asus and gigabyte all the way.
  • 4 Hide
    Proximon , May 29, 2009 6:33 AM
    Really nice article! BIOS screenshots are so important when helping someone configure their board on line, and we do a lot of that around here. I thought you hit all the major points and I especially like the conclusion format.
  • 2 Hide
    andy_mcp1 , May 29, 2009 8:12 AM
    Great article. About time the facts were laid on the table. I've not quite got to upgrading to I7 M-Atx yet, but got an Asus P5E-VM (not the best admittedly) and an E8400 which on air is oc'd to 4.1Ghz stable (for the past 8 months), which I’ve on countless occasions used to show my mates who have full atx systems that bigger isn’t always better as my 3dmark and pcmark scores were better than theirs (of comparable full sized board builds).

    Good point, and I agree, that the hardest thing for the market is for those who have idealisms that the atx board with the most slots are best, have to admit that this not the case, that they don’t need and wont likely use them. It’s about time technology moved on and we start shrinking the components. We've come a long way from house sized computers but seems to have got stuck with fridge-sized atx, time to change that and join the 21st century!
  • -1 Hide
    doomtomb , May 29, 2009 8:13 AM
    The prices between the DFI and Asus are nearly the same, a difference of $20 or $30. The Asus Rampage II Gene wins it in my opinion.
  • 3 Hide
    SpadeM , May 29, 2009 8:36 AM
    For me, it's about the features and backplate I/O ports not the performance, when it comes to motherboards with the same chipset. The differences between them is so little that it doesn't matter in real life. Plus given the fat that motherboards, like processors, aren't identical I might get one that performs lower/better then what's in this review.
  • 1 Hide
    Crashman , May 29, 2009 8:52 AM
    IzzyCraftShame the DFI board didn't do better it help shut up people going where is the Rampage II gene in the Builders marathon.Although this review let me have a little more respect for the board I'm still asus and gigabyte all the way.


    Really, the reason the Rampage II Gene wasn't considered for the $2500 PC is that it didn't show up under a Newegg category search (LGA-1366, Micro ATX) and Newegg didn't fix that until this week. It's a good board, and if you need a weird cooler style, supports the more popular LGA-775 coolers.
  • 0 Hide
    atamanroman , May 29, 2009 9:42 AM
    I like it that uatx is getting more and more attention, since my own i7 uatx cube project is only a few weeks away.

    but im missing the MSI X58M (160€ best prive vs 198€ asus and 190 dfi) here, theres a great review at anandtech. the board really rocks and has only a few weak points (fan control and s3 wake up problem if overclocked). i think ppl would be glad if the msi could be added to this comparison.

    best regards,
    roman
  • -2 Hide
    zehpavora , May 29, 2009 11:41 AM
    Very good article, but I think that the components chosen should be from the same time frame, because I think that the P6T is "too old" compared to the GENE board. Maybe the P6T V2 would be a better idea. Now I fear the Mini-ATXs.
  • 0 Hide
    avatar_raq , May 29, 2009 12:17 PM
    Nice article..I wonder if you were planning on it for a while or you wrote it in response to our comments in the SBM..And yeah it showed what I always expect from ASUS; top notch mobos.
    P eople go for a full atx build simply because they can (:p ), and because larger cases offer better cooling especially for SLI and CF, it's much easier to build and, other than portability, there is no real advantage of a micro-atx build, even the price difference is not worth it in my opinion. But the article does a good job of showing that u-atx boards can be excellent performers.
  • 1 Hide
    Onus , May 29, 2009 12:20 PM
    Excellent article. Any differences between those boards are molehills, not mountains.
    Personally, I'd probably give up a tiny bit of performance for the more noteworthy reduction in power used by DFI; I like the cooler flexibility of the Asus though. It would be a tough call.
  • 0 Hide
    Crashman , May 29, 2009 12:41 PM
    atamanromanI like it that uatx is getting more and more attention, since my own i7 uatx cube project is only a few weeks away.but im missing the MSI X58M (160€ best prive vs 198€ asus and 190 dfi) here, theres a great review at anandtech. the board really rocks and has only a few weak points (fan control and s3 wake up problem if overclocked). i think ppl would be glad if the msi could be added to this comparison.best regards,roman


    The article was put together a month ago, written two weeks ago, and waited in queue while other articles that had time restrictions went up first. That unfortunately left MSI out of contention, since its Micro ATX motherboard was more recently released.
  • -2 Hide
    dman3k , May 29, 2009 2:43 PM
    jtt283Excellent article. Any differences between those boards are molehills, not mountains.Personally, I'd probably give up a tiny bit of performance for the more noteworthy reduction in power used by DFI; I like the cooler flexibility of the Asus though. It would be a tough call.

    I don't know why anyone thinks Asus's Rampage II Gene is better than DFI Lanparty Jr.

    A mATX shouldn't drain as much power as full ATX. Asus's draining more power on idle is a huge negative. I've also always assumed that mATX will not match full ATX in performance. DFI's 14.44% more overall efficiency with 2.26% less performance vs. Asus's 2% more overall efficiency with 0.46% better performance, DFI wins this hands down.

    Sure, if you're out there to get a full ATX board, you might as well get the mATX Asus Rampage II Gene. But if you're out to get a mATX board, which is what this comparison is for, DFI Lanparty Jr is way better.

    DFI is the clear winner in this category.
  • -2 Hide
    ta152h , May 29, 2009 3:36 PM
    I agree with the author on the first page, about micro-ATX being more than adequate. I prefer them over ATX, or BTX motherboards, for the simple reason the cases can be smaller, and generally are more attractive. EATX is useful for dual processors, but ATX is probably either too big for what people need, or too small (for multi-processor configurations, typically server).

    I'd like to see micro-ATX get more popular, and there's really no reason why it should not be. There's no reason at all for lower performance. None.
  • -1 Hide
    Kill@dor , May 29, 2009 3:57 PM
    Very nice review. I'm glad the Gene II showed how much better it is than the full ATX board.
  • 1 Hide
    KyleSTL , May 29, 2009 4:07 PM
    I'm disappointed by the lack of peripheral testing (USB, SATA, IDE, LAN) these are the things that really set MBs apart from one another.
  • 1 Hide
    atamanroman , May 29, 2009 4:55 PM
    KyleSTLI'm disappointed by the lack of peripheral testing (USB, SATA, IDE, LAN) these are the things that really set MBs apart from one another.


    so true, but i havent seen any bad usb performances on x58 boards yet.
  • 0 Hide
    Summer Leigh Castle , May 29, 2009 5:06 PM
    Good review. As stated before, micro-ATX mobos are more than enough for most users. With most modern motherboards coming standard with IEEE and o'plenty of USBs, the need for additional PCI slots or 3xPCI-E is becoming unnecessary (and seriously, 2xPCI-E is more than enough). Also, I'm glad that Gene went with 4x 4-pin fans instead of the typical 3-pin design. I'm hoping to see more companies follow suit with micro-ATX boards.
  • -4 Hide
    pirateboy , May 29, 2009 6:04 PM
    nice, but why not include the msi x58m matx core i7 board?
    http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=3568
  • 0 Hide
    Crashman , May 29, 2009 6:25 PM
    Quote:
    nice, but why not include the msi x58m matx core i7 board?
    http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=3568


    Read the 10th post in this thread.
  • 4 Hide
    Anonymous , May 29, 2009 8:40 PM
    Since when is Firewire obsolete?? It still has better continuous throughput than USB, and works much better with those video appliances that use 1394. While Firewire a and b certainly do not match ESata for throughput, most of the ESata external drives have interfaces that don't take full advantage either - And 1394c will come very close to most drive's maximum throughput if anyone chooses to implement it.
Display more comments