- Jun 4, 2014
- 24
- 0
- 4,520
link:Gigabyte in Ebenezer Mode
hardware.info TEST
link:Spot the differences: Gigabyte motherboard revisions present markedly different test results
The Rev 1.0 board using standard settings (so with the agressive turbo) also throttles back, but only after about 3 minutes, i.e. 12 times later than the Rev 2.0. At that time the highest mosfet temperature we measured is about 100 ºC. With the Rev 1.0 set manually to Intel's default Turbo settings (i.e. the Rev 2.0 default) the CPU stays consistently at its maximum speed of 3.7 GHz without any throttling whatsoever, not even after running Prime95 for over an hour. The mosfet temperature in that test didn't go higher than 90 ºC.
Of course Prima95 is not a normal usage model, so we also did some tests using the Tech Arp x264 benchmark, converting H.264. The workload lasts about 10 minutes.
During the video encoding we don't see any throttling on the Rev 1.0 board, even with its default agressive Turbo setting. The mosfet temperatures remain around 80 degrees. The Rev 2.0 board with Intel's default Turbo, throttles after 6 minutes already back to 800 MHz, with mosfet temperatures between 105 and 112 degrees. The throttling results in a clearly lower score. With the Rev 2.0 board set to the more agressive turbo, the CPU throttles already after 4 minutes of video encoding.
The significantly higher temperature of the components in the CPU power supply and the unbalanced load over the mosfets in the Rev 2.0 board make it likely that the new revision won't last as long as the Rev 1.0, even though we cannot prove that using this test. What we can demonstrate beyond any doubt is that the CPU power supply of the Rev 2.0 board is not up to the task, even for normal consumer workloads. The video encoding test shows that thanks to the lower amount of mosfets temperatures rise much more quickly, leading to CPU throttling and lowered performance. Rev 1.0 does not show that behaviour at all.
GIGABYTE YOU ARE SO BAD
hardware.info TEST
link:Spot the differences: Gigabyte motherboard revisions present markedly different test results
The Rev 1.0 board using standard settings (so with the agressive turbo) also throttles back, but only after about 3 minutes, i.e. 12 times later than the Rev 2.0. At that time the highest mosfet temperature we measured is about 100 ºC. With the Rev 1.0 set manually to Intel's default Turbo settings (i.e. the Rev 2.0 default) the CPU stays consistently at its maximum speed of 3.7 GHz without any throttling whatsoever, not even after running Prime95 for over an hour. The mosfet temperature in that test didn't go higher than 90 ºC.
Of course Prima95 is not a normal usage model, so we also did some tests using the Tech Arp x264 benchmark, converting H.264. The workload lasts about 10 minutes.
During the video encoding we don't see any throttling on the Rev 1.0 board, even with its default agressive Turbo setting. The mosfet temperatures remain around 80 degrees. The Rev 2.0 board with Intel's default Turbo, throttles after 6 minutes already back to 800 MHz, with mosfet temperatures between 105 and 112 degrees. The throttling results in a clearly lower score. With the Rev 2.0 board set to the more agressive turbo, the CPU throttles already after 4 minutes of video encoding.
The significantly higher temperature of the components in the CPU power supply and the unbalanced load over the mosfets in the Rev 2.0 board make it likely that the new revision won't last as long as the Rev 1.0, even though we cannot prove that using this test. What we can demonstrate beyond any doubt is that the CPU power supply of the Rev 2.0 board is not up to the task, even for normal consumer workloads. The video encoding test shows that thanks to the lower amount of mosfets temperatures rise much more quickly, leading to CPU throttling and lowered performance. Rev 1.0 does not show that behaviour at all.
GIGABYTE YOU ARE SO BAD
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram