What's new
  • Please do not post any links until you have 3 posts as they will automatically be rejected to prevent SPAM. Many words are also blocked due to being used in SPAM Messages. Thanks!

ASUS P7P55D Deluxe Lynnfield Motherboard Review

Status
Not open for further replies.

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
Auto Overclocking Results

Auto Overclocking Results



Ten years ago, motherboard manufacturers looked upon overclockers with a level of scorn usually reserved for red-headed step-children. Today, they are offering to do the overclocking for us...what a change!

Automatic overclocking solutions are nothing new, most of us have encountered them in one way or another for quite a few years now. However, they have historically been shockingly ineffective. They either a) didn't work as advertised and locked up your system, or b) worked as advertised and locked up your system. Either way, they were not a joy to use and the results were inevitably disappointing.

On the P7P55D series motherboards, ASUS have unveiled two new auto-overclocking solutions that they believe will drastically change people's perception of 'hands off' overclocking. Utilizing the new TurboV EVO real-time overclocking processor, they promise easier and higher auto-overclocking results. Can they deliver? Let's find out.

ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_111.jpg


BIOS - OC Tuner



ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_152th.jpg
ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_153th.jpg


Click on images to enlarge

The OC Tuner utility can be found within the Ai Tweaker tab in the BIOS, and it offers three different overclocking profiles. We automatically selected the Turbo option, because...well...we're hardcore like that. Upon hitting OK, the system would reboot, then load up to the P.O.S.T screen for less than one second, and then reboot again, continuing this quick cycle for approximately 60 seconds (although ASUS claims that it can take up to about 3-5 minutes). Once OC Tuner is finished doing its magic, it will boot into your operating system as normal. At that point, we recommend running your preferred suite of benchmarking and stress testing utilities just to ensure that everything is nice and stable. Our experience with this solution was essentially flawless, we encountered no issues to speak of, and as you can see above the results were quite impressive. Admittedly, the OC Tuner is a little too tame at overclocking the memory, but nothing's perfect.

We realize that CPU-Z, PC Probe II, and TurboV EVO are all reporting different vCore readings and that is largely because OC Tuner doesn't set a static vCore. Instead, the vCore fluctuates based on the processor load, topping out at approximately 1.35V under full load and falling to 1.06V at idle, and some programs are faster then others at refreshing voltage readouts.

Our only real gripe with this solution is that it resets all the settings in the BIOS, so the full screen logo gets re-enabled, the onboard devices that you may have disabled (audio/FireWire/Serial Port) get re-enabled, etc. It's a minor inconvenience, but you can manually re-disable them again if you wish. ASUS are aware of this issue, and they likely rectify in a future BIOS release. Speaking of BIOS releases, if you want the best possible results, you will want to stay up-to-date with your BIOS, since ASUS' engineers are constantly fine tuning this solution to improve the results.


TurboV EVO - Auto Tuning



ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_156.jpg


Core i5-750 Right, Core i7-870 Left - Click on images to enlarge

The Auto Tuning automatic overclocking feature is a software-based solution that can be found within the new & improved TurboV EVO utility.

Once you enlarge the above TurboV image, you can see that Auto Tuning has two modes, Performance and Extreme. At this point in time, ASUS advises that people use the performance preset since that is where the most work has been done in optimizing the algorithm and stability testing. However, as you can see, our results paled by comparison to the above OC Tuner solution. Furthermore, this method took more than 30 minutes, and on at least one occassion resulted in a system freeze.

Now no one in ther right mind is going to criticize a free automatic 757Mhz overclock on an i5-750, or a 521Mhz overclock on an i7-870, but the fact of the matter is that the OC Tuner solution destroyed the TurboV EVO-based Auto Tuning method, both in terms final overclock and swiftness. We still definitely have to applaud ASUS for both implementations though, clearly the TurboV EVO overclocking processor is not a gimmick, and we can't wait to see how much better it gets over time.
 
Last edited:

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
Synthetic Benchmarks

Synthetic Benchmarks



Lavalys Everest Ultimate v5.02

Everest Ultimate is the most useful tool for any and all benchmarkers or overclockers. With the ability to pick up most voltage, temperature, and fan sensors on almost every motherboard available, Everest provides the ability to customize the outputs in a number of forms on your desktop. We selected two of Everest's seven CPU benchmarks: CPU Queen and FPU Mandel. According to Lavalys, CPU Queen simple integer benchmark focuses on the branch prediction capabilities and the misprediction penalties of the CPU. It finds the solutions for the classic "Queens problem" on a 10 by 10 sized chessboard. At the same clock speed theoretically the processor with the shorter pipeline and smaller misprediction penalties will attain higher benchmark scores. The FPU Mandel benchmark measures the double precision (also known as 64-bit) floating-point performance through the computation of several frames of the popular "Mandelbrot" fractal. Both tests consume less than 1 MB system memory, and are HyperThreading, multi-processor (SMP) and multi-core (CMP) aware.

ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_112.jpg

In stock form, both motherboards are roughly equivalent in the CPU Queen benchmark, with a slight edge going towards the ASUS. But the situation is a fair bit different in FPU Mandel. Why? The reason is simple, the P7P55D Deluxe utilized a 1X higher multiplier throughout the test than the Intel board did. This is a likely a result of clever BIOS tuning by the ASUS engineers.


Lavalys Everest Ultimate v5.02

As part of its enthusiast favourite Cache & Memory Benchmark, Everest provides very useful and in-depth cache performance figures. For this chart, we have combined the read, write, and copy bandwidth figures to achieve an aggregate bandwidth figure for each cache stage.

ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_113.jpg

With their most recent BIOS versions, both the ASUS and Intel motherboards are in a statistical dead heat across all three processor cache levels.


Lavalys Everest Ultimate v5.02

Everest Ultimate is the most useful tool for any and all benchmarkers or overclockers. With the ability to pick up most voltage, temperature, and fan sensors on almost every motherboard available, Everest provides the ability to customize the outputs in a number of forms on your desktop. In addition to this, the memory benchmarking utility provides a useful tool of measuring the changes to your memory sub-system.

ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_114.jpg

The P7P55D Deluxe has a slight advantage across the board when it comes memory bandwidth compared to the Intel model, but really the difference can be attributed to this benchmark's wide results variance.

ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_115.jpg

Surprisingly, the DP55KG trumps the ASUS motherboard when it comes to memory latency, clearly the Intel has more aggressive default secondary memory timings than the P7P55D DLX.


Now let's see if ScienceMark echoes these results.

ScienceMark v2.0

Although last updated almost 3 years ago, and despite its rudimentary interface, ScienceMark v2.0 remains a favorite for accurately calculating bandwidth on even the newest chipsets.

ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_116.jpg

Unlike Everest, ScienceMark reveals the Intel motherboard to have a slight lead in memory bandwidth, but the difference is a mere 0.6%, so it's quite irrelevant.

ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_117.jpg

ScienceMark does however supports Everest's memory latency results, with the DP55KG once again exhibiting lower latency than the ASUS board.


There's really not much to report here as both motherboards are performing within less than 1% of each other in these popular synthetic benchmarks. Will the results be any different in real-life applications? Let's find out.
 
Last edited:

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
System Benchmarks

System Benchmarks



SuperPi Mod v1.5

When running the SuperPI 32MB benchmark, we are calculating Pi to 32 million digits and timing the process. Obviously more CPU power helps in this intense calculation, but the memory sub-system also plays an important role, as does the operating system. We are running one instance of SuperPi via the HyperPi 0.99b interface. This is therefore a single-thread workload.

ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_118.jpg

Here we see the ASUS motherboard completing the calculations 2 seconds faster than its rival, which is roughly 0.3% quicker. Miniscule, but that's expected given the identical configurations.


Cinebench R10


Cinebench R10 64-bit
Test1: Single CPU Image Render
Test2: Multi CPU Image Render
Comparison: Generated Score


Developed by MAXON, creators of Cinema 4D, Cinebench 10 is designed using the popular Cinema software and created to compare system performance in 3D Animation and Photo applications. There are two parts to the test; the first stresses only the primary CPU or Core, the second, makes use of up to 16 CPUs/Cores. Both are done rendering a realistic photo while utilizing various CPU-intensive features such as reflection, ambient occlusion, area lights and procedural shaders

ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_120.jpg

Whatever happened multiplier-wise in the Everest CPU benchmark did not repeat itself in Cinebench, since the ASUS boasts results that are merely 1.5% higher, but every point counts.



PCMark Vantage x64


PCMark Vantage Advanced 64-bit Edition (1.0.0.0)
PCMark Suite / Default Settings
Comparison: Generated Score

The main focus of our General Tasks category lies with the most recent installment of the PCMark series, Vantage. While still classified under the description of a Synthetic benchmark, PCMark Vantage uses many of Vista's (Note - Vantage is Vista-only) built-in programs and features along with its own tests, so it is "real-world" applicable in regards to CPU performance. The following is a general list of the tests in the PCMark suite, very much in line with tasks of an average user: Data encryption, Data compression, CPU image manipulation (compression/decompression/resize), Audio transcoding,Video transcoding,Text editing,Web page rendering, Windows Mail, Windows Contacts, and CPU game test.


ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_119.jpg

Finally, a decisive victory. In PCMark Vantage, the P7P55D Deluxe flexed its muscles and surpassed the DP55KG by a noteworthy 5%.


HDxPRT 2009



HDxPRT 2009, otherwise known as the Intel High Definition Experience and Performance Ratings Test 2009, is a new platform evaluation tool for measuring digital media experience. HDxPRT evaluates the capabilities of a media PC using real world usage scenarios and popular media applications. The benchmark's results are illustrated in the Create HD Score, which represents the overall digital media creation performance of a test system.

HDxPRT 2009 workloads are based on usages performed with popular programs, like: i. DivX encoder to create videos for YouTube, ii. MainConcept H.264 encoder to create videos for Blu-ray discs, iii. Sorenson Squeeze 5 for Flash videos, iv. Adobe Photoshop Elements 7 for Photo editing v. Apple iTunes to convert music for portable media players vi. Cyberlink PowerDVD 8 and Windows Media Player to play H.264 videos vii. On2 Flix 8 Player and Windows Media Player to play Flash videos.


ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_121.jpg

In this true test of multimedia prowess, the ASUS board distinguished itself by being 2% faster than Intel's offering.


Photoshop CS4

For the image editing portion of this review, we will use Photoshop CS4 in coordination with Driver Heaven’s Photoshop Benchmark V3, which is an excellent test of CPU power and memory bandwidth. This is a scripted benchmark that individually applies 15 different filters to a 109MB JPEG, and uses Photoshop’s built-in timing feature to provide a result at each test stage. Then it’s simply a matter of adding up the 15 results to reach the final figure.

ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_122.jpg

Continuing the trend, the P7P55D finishes the Photoshop benchmark a scant 1.5% quicker than the DP55KG.



Lame Front End

Lame Front End v1.0 is a single-threaded application, which means that it only utilizes a single processor core. This will obviously limit performance but it will allow us to see the benefits of Lynnfield aggressive Turbo Boost with single-threaded loads. We will be encoding a WAV rip of Santana’s Supernatural album and converting it to MP3 using the highest fidelity VBR 0 quality preset.

ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_123.jpg

In LFE, the tables are turned, with this single-threaded workload offering the Intel model its first minor victory.


x264 HD Benchmark


x264 HD Benchmark v1.0
Test: MPEG-2 HD 720P Video Clip Conversion to x264
DVD Video Length: 30 Seconds
Comparison: FPS of Second Pass

x264 is quickly becoming the new codec of choice for encoding a growing number of H.264/MPEG-4 AVC videos. Think of it as the new Divx of HD and you can understand why we felt it critical to include. Tech Arp's recent development of the x264 HD Benchmark takes a 30 second HD video clip and encodes it into the x264 codec with the intention of little to no quality loss. The test is measured using the average frames per second achieved during encoding, which scales with processor speed and efficiency. The benchmark also allows the use of multi-core processors so it gives a very accurate depiction of what to expect when using encoding application on a typical full length video.


ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_124.jpg

Although the difference between the two motherboards is less than 1FPS, that equates to a roughly 3.5% difference, with the ASUS being the faster model.



WinRAR


WinRAR 3.8.0
Test: Compression of 1GB of Assorted Files
Comparison: Time to Finish

One of the most popular file compression/decompresion tools, we use WinRAR to compress a 1GB batch of files and archive them, timing the task until completion.


ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_125.jpg

Capping off its victorious streak, the P7P55D Deluxe shaves two seconds of the DP55KG's compression time.


With the ASUS motherboard taking the lead in 7 of the 8 benchmarks, it is indeed the faster motherboard in real-life apps, but the difference is truly minimal at best.
 
Last edited:

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
I/O Benchmarks

I/O Benchmarks



A first here at Hardware Canucks, we have finally included some basic I/O benchmarks. We love to hear your thoughts and ideas about what to implement and whether we should expand to include LAN and audio tests, so let us know on the forums.

HD Tach 3.0.4 - SATA



For this benchmark, HDTach was used. It shows the potential read speed which you are likely to experience with an Intel X25-M 80GB G1 solid state drive (SSD) on this motherboard. The long test was run to give a slightly more accurate picture. The test was run three times with the results averaged out.

We don’t put much stock in Burst speed readings and this goes double for SSDs; the more important number is the Average Speed number. This number will tell you what to expect from a given drive in normal, day to day operations. The higher the average the faster your entire system will seem.

We also test CPU utilization in order to make sure that there isn't a problem needlessly wasting CPU cycles. Lastly, we have also included the random access time, just as another barometer of overall storage sub-system performance. In both cases, the lower the better.


ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_126.jpg

Although the Intel board exhibited higher burst speed (and read the description for our thoughts on burst speed), the P7P55D Deluxe was roughly 5MB/s faster when it came to average read speed. A small, but noteworthy difference.


ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_127.jpg

We are glad to see that both motherboards have identical CPU utilization and random access times, clearly both models are functioning optimally.


HD Tach 3.0.4 - USB



For this benchmark, HDTach was used. It shows the potential read speed which you are likely to experience from this motherboard's USB 2.0 ports. In this test, we connected an external 2.5" 5400RPM hard drive to a USB port, ran the test three times and averaged the results. The long test was run to give a slightly more accurate picture.

We don’t put much stock in Burst speed readings; the more important number is the Average Speed number. This number will tell you what to expect from a given drive in normal, day to day operations. The higher the average the faster your entire system will seem.

We also test CPU utilization in order to make sure that there isn't a problem needlessly wasting CPU cycles. Lastly, we have also included the random access time, just as another barometer of overall storage sub-system performance. In both cases, the lower the better.


ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_128.jpg

Our external 2.5" hard drive can easily saturate the USB 2.0 interface, and it performed identically on both motherboards.

ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_129.jpg

Once again, both the ASUS and Intel motherboards perform identically, with a statistically irrelevant access time advantage going to the P7P55D Deluxe.


HD Tach 3.0.4 - eSATA



For this benchmark, HDTach was used. It shows the potential read speed which you are likely to experience from this motherboard's eSATA port with an Intel X25-M G1 80GB solid state drive. with these hard drives. The long test was run to give a slightly more accurate picture. The test was run three times with the results averaged out.

We don’t put much stock in Burst speed readings and this goes double for SSDs; the more important number is the Average Speed number. This number will tell you what to expect from a given drive in normal, day to day operations. The higher the average the faster your entire system will seem.

We also test CPU utilization in order to make sure that there isn't a problem needlessly wasting CPU cycles. Lastly, we have also included the random access time, just as another barometer of overall storage sub-system performance. In both cases, the lower the better.


ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_130.jpg

Finally, a tangible performance difference. The P7P55D Deluxe does not have an eSATA port on its rear I/O panel. Instead, it relies on an expansion bracket with an eSATA port that connects to the motherboard's black SATA port. This black SATA port is supplied by the JMicron JMB363 SATA & PATA controller. The Intel motherboard on the other hand does have eSATA ports on its rear I/O panel, and those are supplied by a Marvell 88E6145 SATA controller. As you can see by these results, clearly the JMicron solution is the faster of the two, boasting 10MB/s faster average read speeds.

ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_131.jpg

From these results, we can see that the P7P55D Deluxe has slightly higher CPU utilization when eSATA is being used, but it's a mere 1% difference. The access times are identical as when the SSD is plugged into the proper SATA ports, which is an impressive demonstration of eSATA's capabilities.
 
Last edited:

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
Gaming Benchmarks

Gaming Benchmarks



Futuremark 3DMark06


3DMark06 v1.1.0
Graphic Settings: Default
Resolution: 1280X1024

Test: Specific CPU Score and Full Run 3Dmarks
Comparison: Generated Score

The Futuremark 3DMark series has been a part of the backbone in computer and hardware reviews since its conception. The trend continues today as 3DMark06 provides consumers with a solid synthetic benchmark geared for performance and comparison in the 3D gaming realm. This remains one of the most sought after statistics, as well as an excellent tool for accurate CPU comparison, and it will undoubtedly be used for years to come.


ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_132.jpg

In venerable 3DMark06, the P7P55D Deluxe boasts a 2% higher CPU score and Full Score than the Intel DP55KG.



Futuremark 3DMark Vantage


3DMark Vantage v1.0.1
Graphic Settings: Performance Preset
Resolution: 1280X1024

Test: Specific CPU Score and Full Run 3Dmarks
Comparison: Generated Score

3DMark Vantage is the follow-up to the highly successful 3DMark06. It uses DirectX 10 exclusively so if you are running Windows XP, you can forget about this benchmark. Along with being a very capable graphics card testing application, it also has very heavily multi-threaded CPU tests, such Physics Simulation and Artificial Intelligence (AI), which makes it a good all-around gaming benchmark.


ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_133.jpg

Although the ASUS board does once again achieve a 2% higher CPU score than the Intel, the Full Score for both models is effectively identical.

Crysis


Crysis v1.21
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti Aliasing: 0
Quality Settings: High
Global Settings: DX10 / 64-Bit

Test 1: Ice benchmark_CPU2 demo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Still one of the most hardware intensive game on the market today, Crysis has been chosen for its obvious ability to be able to showcase the differences between platforms and to showcase just how far one will need to go in the quest for maximum performance. The game also features the renowned CryEngine, the power behind the incredible graphics, which is expected to be foundation of future titles.


ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_134.jpg

This is not a typo. After three runs each, both motherboard's ended up with precisely the same average FPS in Crysis. Highly improbable, but true!


Far Cry 2


Far Cry 2 1.02
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti Aliasing: 0
Quality Settings: Very High
Global Settings: DX10 Enabled

Test 1: Ranch Long Demo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Far Cry 2 is the hot new new first-person shooter from Ubisoft's Montreal studio, and the first game to utilize the new visually stunning Dunia Engine, which will undoubtedly be used by numerous future games. Using the included Benchmarking Tool, we ran the Long Ranch demo in DX10 mode at 1680x1050 with all settings set to very high.


ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_135.jpg

In Far Cry 2 the situation is much the same as in Crysis, with one-tenth of an FPS seperating both motherboards.


Left 4 Dead


Left 4 Dead (Latest Update)
Resolution: 1680x1050
Filtering: 4X MSAA / Anisotropic 8X
Graphic Settings: High
Shader Detail: Very High
Test 1: HWC Custom Timedemo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Left 4 Dead is the latest disorienting, fast-paced zombie apocalypse mega-hit from Valve. L4D uses the latest version of the Source engine with enhancements such as multi-core processor support and physics-based animation. We test here at 1680x1050 with in-game details set to their highest levels, with MSAA 4X and AA 8X. For benching, we used a pre-recorded 20 minute timedemo taken on the No Mercy campaign during The Apartments mission.


ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_136.jpg

In Left 4 Dead, the Intel DP55KG was faster than the P7P55D Deluxe by a full 4FPS. We really can't explain why the Intel model is so much faster in this game, but it consistently outperformed the ASUS board throughout <u>10</u> timedemo runs.


Valve Particle Simulation Benchmark


Valve Particle Simulation Benchmark
Default
Comparison: Particle Performance Metric

Originally intended to demonstrate new processing effects added to Half Life 2: Episode 2 and future projects, the particle benchmark condenses what can be found throughout HL2:EP2 and combines it all into one small but deadly package. This test does not symbolize the performance scale for just Episode Two exclusively, but also for many other games and applications that utilize multi-core processing and particle effects. As you will see the benchmark does not score in FPS but rather in its own "Particle Performance Metric", which is useful for direct CPU comparisons.


ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_137.jpg

In this benchmark, the results suggest that the ASUS was likely utilizing a 1X higher CPU multiplier throughout most of the test.


Street Fighter 4


Street Fighter 4 Demo
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti-Aliasing: 0X
Graphic Settings: High
Test 1: Built-in Timedemo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Street Fighter IV is a 2008 arcade game produced by famous developer Capcom, that has finally been released on the PC platform. This game has not been 'ported' since the Street Fighter IV arcade machines actually have PC internals, with circa 2005 components. As a result, the version of the game released on the PC is considered the definitive version. With a fully multi-threaded engine and an astounding hybrid 2D/3D graphics style, this game is sure to please all fans of the Street Fighter series.


ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_138.jpg

A minor victory for the P7P55D Deluxe here, but as you can tell, our GeForce GTX 280 is clearly the bottleneck in this benchmark.


World in Conflict


World in Conflict v1.010
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti-Aliasing: 4X
Anisotropic Filtering: 4X
Graphic Settings: Very High
Test 1: Built-in Benchmark
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

One of the most visually stunning real-time strategy games in recent history, World in Conflict can really push systems to the brink, which is what we attempt by running the game in DirectX 10 mode at 1680x1050 with all settings maxed out. For this test we used the in-game benchmarking tool.


ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_139.jpg

Both motherboards are effectively tied in WiC, with the DP55KG having the slight edge in minimum frame rates.


Overall, when it comes to single graphics card gaming, neither motherboard is really faster than the other, since the performance differences are more often than not less than 1%.
 
Last edited:

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
SLI Gaming Benchmarks

SLI Gaming Benchmarks



As most of you know, there was a huge amount of excitement surrounding X58 motherboards being the first Intel chipset-based motherboards to officially support NVIDIA's SLI multi-GPU technology. The SLI support is not native to the X58 chipset though, motherboard manufacturers have to pay NVIDIA to obtain a 'bios key' to unlock SLI on whichever motherboard they decide the implement the feature on. The situation is identical this time around on P55 motherboards, and we are glad to report that the P7P55D Deluxe is one of the models that supports SLI. With this in mind, we decided test out how well it scales from one to two graphics cards, and how it performs compared to the similarly SLI-enabled Intel DP55KG.

For this test, we whipped out two EVGA GeForce 8800 GT AKIMBO SuperClocked (512-P3-N808) graphics cards, which are fastest GeForce 8800 GT's models ever built with clock speeds of 720/1728/2000, compared to 600/1500/1800 for reference cards.


Futuremark 3DMark Vantage


3DMark Vantage v1.0.1
Graphic Settings: Performance Preset
Resolution: 1280X1024

Test: Specific CPU Score and Full Run 3Dmarks
Comparison: Generated Score

3DMark Vantage is the follow-up to the highly successful 3DMark06. It uses DirectX 10 exclusively so if you are running Windows XP, you can forget about this benchmark. Along with being a very capable graphics card testing application, it also has very heavily multi-threaded CPU tests, such Physics Simulation and Artificial Intelligence (AI), which makes it a good all-around gaming benchmark.


ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_141.jpg

Both motherboards exhibited very similar scaling from 1 to 2 cards, with a 77% performance increase from SLI, and both models performed within 1% of each other.

Crysis


Crysis v1.21
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti Aliasing: 0
Quality Settings: High
Global Settings: DX10 / 64-Bit

Test 1: Ice benchmark_CPU2 demo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Still one of the most hardware intensive game on the market today, Crysis has been chosen for its obvious ability to be able to showcase the differences between platforms and to showcase just how far one will need to go in the quest for maximum performance. The game also features the renowned CryEngine, the power behind the incredible graphics, which is expected to be foundation of future titles.


ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_142.jpg

Surprisingly, in this graphically-intensive game the P7P55D Deluxe demonstrated noticeable better scaling (63% vs. 52%) than the Intel model.

Far Cry 2


Far Cry 2 1.02
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti Aliasing: 0
Quality Settings: Ultra High
Global Settings: DX10 Enabled

Test 1: Ranch Long Demo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Far Cry 2 is the hot new new first-person shooter from Ubisoft's Montreal studio, and the first game to utilize the new visually stunning Dunia Engine, which will undoubtedly be used by numerous future games. Using the included Benchmarking Tool, we ran the Long Ranch demo in DX10 mode at 1680x1050 with all settings set to very high.


ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_143.jpg

While the scaling in Far Cry 2 much less than in Crysis, we once again see the ASUS motherboard boasting much better results (21% vs. 13%) than the DP55KG.


World in Conflict


World in Conflict v1.010
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti-Aliasing: 4X
Anisotropic Filtering: 4X
Graphic Settings: Very High
Test 1: Built-in Benchmark
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

One of the most visually stunning real-time strategy games in recent history, World in Conflict can really push systems to the brink, which is what we attempt by running the game in DirectX 10 mode at 1680x1050 with all settings maxed out. For this test we used the in-game benchmarking tool.


ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_144.jpg

In this popular RTS game both motherboards performed and scaled effectively the same, boasting a roughly 60% increase from one to two graphics cards.
 
Last edited:

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
Voltage Regulation / Power Consumption

Voltage Regulation / Power Consumption



Our voltage regulation testing will focus on the various voltages and the differences encountered between what is selected in the BIOS, what is reported by the PC Probe II utility (when available), and what is measured by a digital multi-meter (DMM). We have found five voltage read points on this motherboard (vCORE, CPU VTT, CPU PLL, PCH, vDIMM), and they will be examined with our trusty DMM. All five voltages were measured from read points on the front of the motherboard. The ground point used for all readings will be a screw hole. Here are a few photos showing the various read points used, which are all conveniently located in the top-right corner of the P7P55D Deluxe.

Voltage Regulation



ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_147th.jpg
ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_148th.jpg

ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_149th.jpg
ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_150th.jpg

Click on images to enlarge

Now that we have established where the read points are, let’s have a look at the results. These measurements were taken at stock system speeds and with C1E, SpeedStep, Turbo Boost, and Thermal Monitor disabled in the BIOS. Just to clarify, the vCore (LLC) section is the vCore results with Load-Line Calibration enabled. Here are our extensive findings:

ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_146.jpg

What can we say? The P7P55D Deluxe has damn near perfect voltage output, and there is effectively no variance between idle and load states for any of the voltages. Most impressive! The most noteworthy voltage is obviously the vCore, and not only is accurate but absolutely stable as well. The exception to this is when the vCore is set to auto and Load-Line Calibration (LLC) is also set to auto, where you get a roughly 5% voltage droop, as per Intel's specifications. Nevertheless, to demonstrate just how good the vCore line is, let's take a closer look at the vCore's characteristics with a one-hour OCCT stress test using our 'Overall Stable System Overclock'.

ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_145.jpg

Usually, we would have two vCore charts above, one with Load-Line Calibration enabled and one with it disabled. However, on the P7P55D Deluxe, as soon as you manually select the CPU core voltage LLC gets enabled automatically. Therefore, unless a user manually disables it (and there's no reason to), this is what the vCore line will look like. As you can see, the vCore line is absolutely perfect, showing no variance from idle to load and zero ripples. Clearly, this model has well engineered CPU PWM design.


Power Consumption


All motherboard manufacturers boast that their products have the lowest power consumption and feature the latest new development in energy efficiency. Well that is what we are here to find out.

For this test, every BIOS option was reset to its default setting and the Windows Vista power plan was changed from High Performance to Balanced. Lastly, we set the ASUS EPU-6 Engine to AUTO mode to allow it to fully manage system power consumption. We also ran this test without EPU being installed on the system, to see what the difference would be.

For our idle test, we let the system idle for 15 minutes and measured the peak wattage through our UPM EM100 power meter.

For our CPU load test, we ran Prime 95 In-place large FFTs on all available threads for 15 minutes, measuring the peak wattage via the UPM EM100 power meter.

For our overall system load test, we ran Prime 95 In-place large FFTs on all available threads for 15 minutes, while simultaneously loading the GeForce GTX 280 with OCCT v3.1.0 GPU:OCCT stress test at 1680x1050@60Hz in fullscreen mode.


ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_140.jpg

In bone stock form, the P7P55D Deluxe actually exhibited slightly lower power consumption across the board than the Intel DP55KG. The differences ranged from 2% to 4.5%, which is minimal but still noteworthy in the long-term. Enabling EPU didn't really rectify the situation, if anything it made it worse. While the idle power consumption dropped a bit, matching the Intel board, the CPU load and full system load values actually went up. Why? Well when set to AUTO mode, the EPU software will actually slightly overclock the processor under heavy lead load scenarios. As a result, the energy consumption obviously increases a bit. We could have set the software to maximum power savings, but it underclocks the system to such an extent that it cripples system performance while doing intensive tasks. All in all though, the power consumption differences between these two motherboards are minimal, and are frankly irrelevant when you consider that the Lynnfield/P55 platform provides the very best Performance-per-Watt on the market.
 
Last edited:

MAC

Associate Review Editor
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,086
Location
Montreal
Conclusion

Conclusion


After having preview the ASUS P7P55D Deluxe back in mid-August, and having it sit on our workbench for a few weeks while we reviewed the Intel Lynnfield processors, it was nice to finally be able to boot-up and spend some quality time with this motherboard. Now that we are done with this review, we can state that it has been worth the wait.

For starters, from a specifications standpoint, this motherboard certainly does not leave us wanting. With a robust 16+3 phase power design, four DDR3 memory slots supporting DDR3-2200 (O.C), three mechanical PCI-E x16 slots and many other features, this model comes equipped with all the goodies that power users want and need.

ASUS_P7DP55D_Deluxe_151.jpg

ASUS is really putting an emphasis on overclocking with the P7P55D series, and nowhere is this more evident than on this Deluxe model. Those who like a more hands on approach to overclocking obviously won't be disappointed since this motherboard encompasses everything that we have come to expect from a high-end ASUS motherboard: a user-friendly BIOS, wide assortment of tweaking options, superior voltage output & regulation, excellent stability at the limit and just high limits in general. These are aspects that we have come to expect from a good motherboard though. What's new are the two most competent automatic overclocking solutions that we have come across yet. While the Auto Tuning feature in the TurboV EVO utility achieved good results, albeit slowly, the BIOS-based OC Tuner was downright amazing, overclocking our i5-750 to 3.6Ghz and our i7-870 to 3.8Ghz in a matter of minutes. And these were stable overclocks, which was perhaps the most surprising part.

The included TurboV Remote worked just as it should, but it's a little too limited for us. From an overclocking point-of-view, all you can really do with this device is select overclocking profiles or adjust the BCLK up or down. At minimum we would like to be able to control system voltages as well, maybe in coordination with an on-screen GUI. Otherwise, the most use this remote will likely get is as a means of powering the system on/off via the power button. With this in mind, for those who don't care about the remote, and don't mind losing 4 CPU phases, the P7P55D EVO may be a slightly better alternative, especially since it's $20-30CDN less.

While we can't specifically state whether we saw any direct benefit from the 16+3 phase power design or the new T.Probe load-leveling feature, the CPU core voltage regulation was perfect even under the stress of a generously overclocked and overvolted 4.0Ghz Core i7-870, and the the MOSFET heatsinks did remain surprisingly lukewarm. Can 8 phase power designs like the one found the on the MSI P55-GD80 perform as well? We will testing out that shortly.

While we have not yet tested enough P55 motherboards to be able to proclaim which is the very best, we do know that the P7P55D Deluxe is a very good product, and we have no qualms recommending it to the enthusiast crowd. In summary, this is a feature-rich, mature, stable, overclockable, high performance P55 motherboard.



Pros

- Solid performance.
- Eye-pleasing theme & heatsink designs.
- Well thought out layout.
- Nice spacing between the PCI-E slots.
- 2-Way CrossFireX & 2-Way SLI capability.
- Excellent manual overclocking capabilities.
- Impressive (& constantly improving) automatic overclocking features.
- Effectively flawless voltage regulation & output.
- Good SATA II & USB 2.0 connectivity.
- 10-channel HD audio CODEC
- Comprehensive, user-friendly BIOS.
- Rich software suite.
- Socketed BIOS chip.


Cons

- Only one BIOS chip, no backup or fail-safe.
- Large CPU coolers + tall memory heatspreaders can cause installation annoyances.
- No eSATA port(s) on the rear I/O panel (have to install an expansion bracket).
- TurboV Remote header & connector are a little fragile (+ the header should also be on the I/O panel).
- BIOS needs more voltage readouts.




damgood.jpg


Our thanks to ASUS for making this review possible!​

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top