Gaming Performance- FPS

As usual, gaming performance was tested with a variety of current games. We ran benchmarks with our standard 1280x1024 resolution. Given the number of users that run 19 inch LCDs these days, 1280x1024 represents one of the most commonly used resolutions. We will show 1600x1200 4xAA/8xAF and 1920x1200 4xAA/8XAF results in part three of our roundup when we test the motherboards that are capable of running CrossFire.

Battlefield 2

This benchmark is performed using DICE's built-in demo playback functionality with additional capture capabilities designed in house. During the benchmark, the camera switches between players and vehicles in order to capture the most action possible. There is a significant amount of smoke, explosions, and vehicle usage as this a very GPU intensive Battlefield 2 benchmark. We run Battlefield 2 using the highest quality graphics settings available in the video settings. The game itself is best experienced with average in-game frame rates of 35 and up.

Gaming Performance - Battlefield 2

F.E.A.R.

F.E.A.R. uses a built-in performance test that generates graphical test scenes based upon the actual game engine. This test consists of a couple of different action sequences, a stressful water flyby, and heavy use of shadows while traveling through hallways. F.E.A.R. is a very graphics intensive game and we switch all settings to maximum. An average frame rate for F.E.A.R. that can dip into the teens is not good for a first person shooter, but the game is still playable to around 25 fps, although we prefer 35fps.

Gaming Performance - F.E.A.R.

Half-Life 2: Lost Coast

We use the built-in timedemo feature to benchmark the game. Our timedemo consists of starting at the bottom of the hill near the lake and ending in the old church. The Source engine timedemo feature is similar to the nettimedemo of Id's Doom 3 engine, in that it plays back more than just the graphics. The highest visual quality settings possible were used with HDR turned on. While the Source engine is notorious for giving great frame rates for almost any hardware setup, we find the game isn't as enjoyable if it isn't running at 35fps or above.

Gaming Performance - Half Life 2

Quake 4

There has always been a lot of debate in the community surrounding pure timedemo benchmarking. We have opted to stick with the nettimedemo test rather than the timedemo option for motherboard benchmarking of Quake 4. To be clear, this means our test results focus mostly on the performance one would experience during actual game play. Additionally, Quake 4 limits frame rate to 60 fps during gameplay whether or not VSync is enabled. Our benchmark utilizes the IdNetDemo. This demo includes mainly outdoor areas with numerous players trying to wipe each other out. We tested the game with High Quality settings (uncompressed normal maps), and we enabled all the advanced graphics options except for VSync.

Gaming Performance - Quake 4

Serious Sam II

This benchmark is performed using Croteam's built-in demo capability in the Serious Sam II engine. We utilize the included Branchester Demo and capture the playback results using the Ctrl-~ function. The benchmark features a large number of combatants, explosions, and general mayhem. The benchmark is primarily GPU sensitive with the actual percentage of GPU/CPU/Audio activity being displayed during the benchmark run. We typically find this game is very playable at average in-game rates of 60 and above. We maximize all settings except antialiasing and anisotropic filtering within the general and advanced video settings.

Gaming Performance - Serious Sam II

FPS Gaming Summary

Our test results basically speak for themselves. If you utilize the same chipset you can expect the same results during benchmark testing. The differences between each board are minor and during actual game play we could not tell any differences amongst the motherboards tested today. We did not experience any issues during testing or during game play with each board. We generally play games for a couple of hours with each board to ensure there are no issues such as overheating, stuttering, or network issues when playing on-line. The one result that did catch our eye is that the performance of the Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3 was very consistent throughout testing as the board scored near or at the top in every game. We attribute this to Gigabyte programming in slightly tighter memory and MCH timings than the other manufacturers. Of course this is affecting their overclocking capability at this time.

Media Encoding Performance Gaming Performance - RTS & Simulation
Comments Locked

62 Comments

View All Comments

  • zjohnr - Tuesday, November 7, 2006 - link

    In all the features tables for the motherboards in this article the PCI slots are listed as being PCI v2.3. However, looking at the pictures for the boards, the slots have PCI v2.2 keying. I think the entry in the features tables is wrong. (Is it?)
  • Patsoe - Saturday, October 28, 2006 - link

    Seeing all the trouble with the P965 - especially with the non-intel p-ata controller and with the ich8r - I'd be inclined to get a Core2-ready i945P board with ICH7R instead. Would that be a sane idea?
  • BadThad - Tuesday, October 24, 2006 - link

    Is the v1.02G Asus P5B-E using all solid capacitors? I read a press release stating that Asus was releasing the "P4B-E Plus" version with all solid caps. Rumor says the "Plus" version will not be sold in the USA.....arrgggggg. Tell me that's not true. I want the solid caps for long-term reliability. I'm wondering if our "Plus" is actually the v1.02G?

    Thanks
  • Gary Key - Tuesday, October 24, 2006 - link

    The 1.01G and 1.02G boards are exactly the same except for a PLL controller. Asus stills states the P5B-Plus will not be imported into the States but you never know.
  • keithke - Monday, October 23, 2006 - link

    I was interested to hear you used this Scythe Infinity Air Cooler as I was going to do the same. Were there any issues with the Northbridge heatsink sitting so close? Or did it just plop right in with no spacing issues?

    Thx
    Keith
  • Gary Key - Tuesday, October 24, 2006 - link

    No issues with the Inifinity on all four corners. It is a close fit but it works fine with the enclosed fan.
  • SniperWulf - Monday, October 23, 2006 - link

    Hey guys,

    Did you have any strange anomolies with the X-fi on the DS3 while overclocked? When I was using that board with the F6 bios, I'd have to reboot like 3-4 times before windows would properly detect it. I eventually grew tired of it and bought a P5B-D so I haven't had a chance to try F7 with it.
  • Gary Key - Monday, October 23, 2006 - link

    I did not have any issues with the X-FI on the DS3 when it was overclocked. The F5 and F6 BIOS releases were not X-FI friendly where F4 was perfect. F7 is working for some and not others, I did not have an issue with it. F8 will fix it for good.
  • schlumpfi106 - Monday, October 23, 2006 - link

    Im a little bit disappointed that there are so few informations about the cooling/silencing-related capabilitites of the boards. I would like to know how many fans can be connected, if the connectors are 3- or 4-pin, and if there is a way to control the fan speeds (preferably via SpeedFan). I don't care about a one-percent performance difference. My first priority is a reasonably silent system.
  • goinginstyle - Monday, October 23, 2006 - link

    quote:

    I would like to know how many fans can be connected, if the connectors are 3- or 4-pin, and if there is a way to control the fan speeds (preferably via SpeedFan).


    He mentioned the number of fan headers on each board and even added a couple of comments on the ones that did not work right. In the features section there was a statement about whether the included utility worked or not. Sure he did not say anything about SpeedFan but how far do you want a guy to go after 26 pages? Also, if you click on the Enlarge picture on the boards you can clearly make out whether the fan headers are 3 or 4 pin.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now