MSI P55-GD80 LGA1156 Motherboard Review‏

[MAC]

Overclocking Results

Manual Overclocking Results

If you are buying or building a Lynnfield/P55 system chances are that you don't already own a Core i7/X58 system. Many of you will likely be transitioning over from Intel Core 2-based systems and you have to realize that overclocking Core i5/i7 processors is quite different than with the previous Core 2 architecture. There are now four important clock speeds (CPU/BCLK/MEM/QPI) and three multipliers (CPU/MEM/QPI) to tweak, as well as five different voltages. Put simply, there are lot of new variables and potential limitations that an overclocker must now take into consideration. At the moment, no one is an expert when it comes to Lynnfield overclocking, and we are all learning new tricks and tweaks on a weekly basis. At this point in time, for our overclocking tests we have a imposed a few relatively conservative voltage limits, namely vCore up to 1.40 vCore, VTT/IMC up to 1.35V, and vDIMM up to 1.70V. It is our estimation that these voltages can be safely used 24/7 without seriously shortening the lifespan of any components...with proper cooling of course.

Highest Stable BCLK Overclock

Click on images to enlarge​

BCLK overclocking has thus far proven to be a very interesting experience for us. On the one hand, our i5-750 sample has proven quite BCLK friendly, achieving a stable 212Mhz with as little as 1.21V VTT/IMC. However, no matter how much additional voltage we gave the chip, it wouldn't gain 1Mhz of additional stable BCLK headroom. On the other hand, our i7-870 is a voltage hog, needing a full 1.35V VTT/IMC in order to stabilize a 202Mhz BCLK. Why this huge disparity between chips? Well, to be honest, our particular i7-870 sample is probably just a little weak in the BCLK area. We have seen several i7-800 series retail chips that are stable in 210-215Mhz BCLK range.

With regard to the P55-GD80, we were able to squeeze an additional 3Mhz BLCK from our i5-750 sample compared with the ASUS P7P55D Deluxe, but one less BCLK Mhz from the i7-870 which was only stable up to 201.5Mhz compared to 202.7Mhz on the ASUS, an insignificant difference.

Highest Stable CPU Overclock

Click on images to enlarge​

In our search for the highest stable core clock, we were able to once again break 4.0Ghz mark on both chips. Specifically, we were able to achieve 4064Mhz with 1.40 vCore on the i5-750, and 4022Mhz at 1.35 vCore on the i7-870. Why did we only use 1.35V on the 870? Heat! HyperThreading increases core temps by a solid 10C, so at these settings we were already well within the high 80C range, with the very occassional peak into the low 90C's. Once Thermalright releases a proper LGA1156 mounting mechanism, instead of the push-pin design that was bundled with our MUX-120, we should be able to push both chips even higher and with lower temps too thanks to better contact and mounting pressure.

Both of these results are slightly lower (~20Mhz) than what we achieved on the ASUS P7P55D Deluxe, which is effectively just a 1Mhz BCLK difference.

Highest Stable Memory Overclock

Click on image to enlarge​

While searching for the highest stable memory overclock, we pushed aside our i5-750 due to its weak IMC and focused on the i7-870. In doing so, we were able to achieve a solid DDR3-2167 9-9-9-24-1T with 1.65Vdimm and our self-imposed 1.35V VTT/IMC voltage limit. The P55-GD80 officially supports up DDR3-2133 via overclocking, so surpassing that specification by a 34Mhz is not too shabby. Having said that, we could not quite match the DDR3-2200 frequency that we achieved on the P7P55D Deluxe, even after tweaking some of the secondary timings (tWR, tWTR, tRRD, tRTP, tFAW, etc).

Auto Overclocking Results

Now 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. Is MSI's implementation truly better? Let's find out!

While the above results are what were able to manually achieve with this motherboard, the P55-GD80 is outfitted with a new auto-overclocking solution that they claim works in one second flat. Utilizing the new OC Genie overclocking processor, they promise easier and higher auto-overclocking results. Basically, all you need to engage this feature is push the OC Genie button and then start the system. Let's see what it can do:

Click on images to enlarge​

As you can see, the OC Genie feature does work, as it managed to overclock our i5-750 by 26% and our i7-870 by 27%, which are 674Mhz and 801Mhz gains, respectively. However, as you can see by the identical BCLK, vCore, and memory settings, this not really what we would call a 'smart' auto-overclocking solution. It doesn't adjust the overclock based on the individual capabilities of your components. Instead, it uses presets that MSI's engineers have determined would work on every 750/860/870 manufactured. By attempting to ensure that every single chip would hit the same levels, no matter how weak it was, they had to be quite liberal with the voltage. As result, OC Genie automatically sets quite high voltages: 1.38V vCore, 1.40V VTT on i5-750, 1.44V VTT on the i7-870, and a full 1.74V vDimm. Now OC Genie automatically enables Load-Line Calibration (LLC), but it clearly does not work on our motherboard. As a result, that 1.38Vcore drops to 1.30-1.32V under heavy load. While this might seem terrible, it does keep temperatures lower and the overclock was still completely stable.

Now we understand that the VTT was set so high to ensure that every processor would be able to achieve the high 196.5Mhz BCLK that OC Genie sets, but we cannot understand why they took this approach. They could have simply used a higher multiplier and lower BCLK, like ASUS have done, which would not require such high VTT voltages. We wouldn't want any of our chips running 1.40V+ VTT 24/7 since no one knows what the medium and long-term effects are yet.

The memory voltage is also completely overkill, since DDR3-1179 7-7-7 is achievable with just about any cheap generic DDR3 memory kit, and no one is going to use subpar memory on a high-end model like the P55-GD80. Common sense dictates that the Intel-specified 1.65V memory voltage limit would have been sufficient in this case.

Believe it or not, we like the OC Genie feature since it provides novices with a near-instantaneous method of significantly boosting overall performance. However, the current implementation could and should be improved, specifically with regard to the low CPU multiplier/high BCLK approach that necessitates high VTT. Hopefully, MSI will implementent a high multiplier/low BCLK approach in a future BIOS update, and with lower voltages too. Higher memory frequencies would be nice as well, but we understand that there are simply too many variables to make this a reality.

 

[MAC]

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.

In stock form, all three 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, both the ASUS and MSI utilized a 1X higher multiplier throughout the test than the Intel board did.


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.

With their most recent BIOS versions, all three motherboards are effectively even 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.

Once again, all three motherboards are even when it comes memory bandwidth, and any differences can be attributed to this benchmark's wide results variance.

Although the P55-GD80 consistently had the highest memory latency, the difference between it and the ASUS model was a mere 1%. On the other hand, the DP55KG keeps its crown as latency champion at the moment, largely due to its more aggressive default secondary memory timings.


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.

ScienceMark reveals the MSI to have the lowest memory bandwidth of all three motherboards, but the difference between the models is a mere 1.5%.

ScienceMark does support Everest's memory latency results, with the MSI once again exhibiting higher latency than both the ASUS and Intel models.

There's really not much to report here as all three motherboards are performing within less than 1-2% of each other in these popular synthetic benchmarks. Will the results be any different in real-life applications? Let's find out.

 

[MAC]

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.

Although the MSI was slower than either the ASUS or Intel motherboards, there difference was truly trivial at a mere 0.9%. Once you start overclocking, and manually tweaking all the second memory timings, this gap would very likely vanish.

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

Here we see that the P55-GD80 edged out the ASUS board in multi-threaded performance, but was surpassed in the single-threaded test. Both were a bit faster than Intel's enthusiast offering.

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.

While the P55-GD80 was a bit faster than Intel's board, the P7P55D Deluxe was still a fair bit faster than both in this test.

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.

Once again, the MSI falls a little bit behind the P7P55D Deluxe, but it's still faster than the DP55KG.


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.

Continuing the trend, the P55-GD80 places second behind the P7P55D Deluxe, with the Intel coming in last.


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.

In LFE, the tables are turned with the MSI coming in last, and the Intel board claiming 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.

The MSI comes in second once again, but all three models are seperated by less than 1FPS, which equates to a roughly 3.5% difference.

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.

Continuing the trend, the MSI places second behind the ASUS, and slightly surpasses the DP55KG's compression time.


The MSI P55-GD80 took the lead in 1 of the 8 benchmarks, came in last once, and finished second behind the ASUS P7P55D Deluxe in all the others. Truthfully though, you'll never notice the performance difference in these real-life apps.

 

[MAC]

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.

Although the MSI board exhibited the highest burst speed (and read the description for our thoughts on burst speed), the P7P55D Deluxe was still a tiny bit faster when it came to average read speed.

We are glad to see that all three motherboards have identical CPU utilization and random access times, clearly they are all 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.

For some reason, the MSI's USB 2.0 performance was consistently a touch slower than the ASUS and Intel models, but it's unnoticeable on a day-to-day basis.

The P55-GD80 tied with the DP55KG when it came to access times, with the ASUS being a little bit faster. CPU utilization was once again equal across the board.

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.

Both the P55-GD80 and the P7P55D Deluxe utilize the same JMicron JMB363 controller for eSATA support, and as such they achieved very similar performance levels. Both were a good deal faster than the Intel DP55KG, which uses by a Marvell 88E6145 controller.

Once again, the MSI and ASUS are equal, but Intel board has slightly lower CPU utilization. The access times are identical to when the SSD is plugged directly into the SATA ports, which is an impressive demonstration of eSATA's capabilities.

 

[MAC]

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.

In 3DMark06, the MSI P55-GD80 is a little bit slower than the P7P55D Deluxe in both CPU score and Full Score, but they both easily surpass 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.

Once again, the MSI and ASUS boards are effectively tied, both achieving a roughly 2% higher CPU score than the Intel model.

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.

Here we finally have the MSI taking the lead, surpassing the ASUS and Intel boards which were tied in this benchmark.

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.

In Far Cry 2, the MSI and ASUS boards were tied in average frame rates, with the ASUS achieving a slightly higher minimum frame rate.

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.

In Left 4 Dead, the P55-GD80 handily outperformed its competitors by 5.5% and 2.0% respectively. We really can't explain why the ASUS model is so much slower in this game, but it was consistently outperformed throughout <u>10</u> timedemo runs.

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.

Both the MSI and ASUS are tied in this benchmark, but our GeForce GTX 280 is the bottleneck here.

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.

All three motherboards are effectively tied here, with the DP55KG having the slight edge in minimum frame rates.


Overall, when it comes to single graphics card gaming, none of the motherboards are really faster than the others, since the performance differences are less than 1%.

 

[MAC]

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 P55-GD80 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 ASUS P7P55D Deluxe.

For this test, we are using two EVGA GeForce GTX 280 1GB (01G-P3-1280-AR) graphics cards, which are referenced clocked parts.

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.

Both motherboards exhibited very similar scaling from 1 to 2 cards, with a 63-64% 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.

Once again, we have both motherboards exhibiting nearly identical SLI scaling and overall performance.

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.

Continuing the trend, both boards performed equally, achieving 50-51% SLI performance scaling.

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.

Although the MSI was a little faster overall in this benchmark, the ASUS board did have slightly better SLI scaling (42% vs 38%).

 

[MAC]

Voltage Regulation / Power Consumption

Voltage Regulation / Power Consumption

Click on images to enlarge​

Our voltage regulation testing will focus on the various voltages and the differences encountered between what is selected in the BIOS and what is measured by a digital multi-meter (DMM). Thanks to the V-Check Points, we didn't have to go poking & prodding everywhere, since all the voltage read points are located in one convenient spot. The concept is pretty simple, simply plug your DMM leads into the V-Check cables, and plug one cable into the desired voltage point and the other into a ground point.

Voltage Regulation

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 findings:

As you can see, Load-Line Calibration is broken on this motherboard...or they simply mixed up enable/disable in the BIOS. We tried the three latest BIOS versions (1.2/1.3/1.4), and all three exhibited the exact same issue. This is both bad quality assurance on MSI's behalf and downright embarassing for every other site that reviewed this motherboard and never noticed the problem. If LLC is not actually broken, and they simply inversed enable/disable, then we aren't satisfied with this motherboard's 'default' vCore output, since an up to 0.08V droop between what is selected in the BIOS and what the P55-GD80 outputs under load is simply too large a difference. (- Oct. 21 '09: This issue has been resolved, see update in the conclusion.)

Aside from this hiccup, the other voltages are really quite good.


Now usually we would run a one-hour OCCT stress to take a closer look at the vCore's characteristics while under heavy load, but...

...as you can see, OCCT 3.1.0 doesn't recognize this motherboard vCore line, so there's not much we can do.

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 tan 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 GPU with OCCT v3.1.0 GPU:OCCT stress test at 1680x1050@60Hz in fullscreen mode.

As you can see, the MSI P55-GD80 proved to be the most power efficient P55 motherboard that we have come across, by far! The Green Power feature is enabled by default, and it is clearly interacting with the DrMOS PWM to produce some impressively low power consumption numbers. Not only do the DrMOS 3-in-1 MOSFETs feature higher efficiency than traditional MOSFETs, up to 96% as per MSI, but they have much lower power loss as well. The results speak for themselves.

 

[MAC]

Conclusion

Conclusion

First, let's start with the physical aspects of the board. The overall layout is quite good considering how many additional features MSI have built onto the P55-GD80. The majority of the connectors and ports are on the edge of the motherboard, or as close as can be. There is a good variety of expansion slots and their layout is decent, although those planning to install a third dual-slot graphics card in the bottommost PCI-E x16 have to consider the overhang issue. The passive, low profile cooling system is tasteful and does its job very well. The V-Check points and the V-Switch are readily accessible, although obviously those using a test bench will have the easiest time using them. The touch-sensitive Easy Button 2 panel works surprisingly well, and it's one of the better novelty features that we have seen as of late.

From an overclocking point-of-view, the P55-GD80 couldn't quite match the impressive ASUS P7P55D Deluxe in outright core clock, but it did manage to squeeze a little extra BCLK out of our Core i5-750. On the memory front, the MSI once again fell behind the P7P55D's overclocking capabilities, but did a achieve solid DDR3-2167 9-9-9. A BIOS update could feasibly close this very minor gap.

While overclocking, the Direct OC buttons really came in handy when balancing right on the edge of stability. It was an infinitely better solution than using the problem-prone Control Center software. Likewise, the V-Check points proved indispensable, since they allowed us to easily confirm our suspicions that Load-Line Calibration (LLC) was not working properly. Whether it is truly broken or they simply mixed up with the enabled/disabled settings, we don't know but it doesn't exactly help our opinion of the P55-GD80. Thankfully, this is a problem that could instantly be fixed with a update BIOS.

The OC Genie feature was foolproof and pretty much as quick as promised (1-2 second OC). While it did automatically overclock our i5-750 to 3.34Ghz and our i7-870 to 3.73Ghz, these results are not quite as good as what we achieved with the P7P55D's auto-overclocking solution. Furthermore, the voltages that OC Genie used to achieve these overclocks were needlessly high in our opinion, and potentially even a little dangerous in the long-term.

To conclude, when we first got this motherboard for preview, we were excited to try it out since it appeared that MSI had a product that could easily go toe-to-toe against the other high-end P55 motherboards that had been unveiled. Now that we have spent a considerable amount of time with the P55-GD80 we are still convinced of this, but it needs to be polished a little bit more. The hardware is sound and that's 90% of the battle, but the BIOS (ie: LLC) and the software still need some work.

Keep an eye on this space, as we will surely have an update shortly.


Update (Oct. 21 2009):

We just had the opportunity to try out a BETA bios (V1.6B5), and it renames 'Load Line Calibration' to 'VDroop Control'. The options for this setting are likewise relabeled from 'Enabled/Disabled' to 'Low VDroop/High VDroop'. This resolves our criticism of the LLC implementation. In effect, 'Enabled' becomes 'High VDroop', which supports our findings.

The day after we posted this review, MSI also released a new version of Control Center on their website (1.0.130). This new version appears to have fixed the errors and stability issues that we had encountered with the 1.0.128 build of this application.

Given these developments, once an updated BIOS is officially released on MSI's website, the P55-GD80 will be worthy of our Dam Good Award.

Update (Oct. 30 2009):

The proper final version 1.6 BIOS has now been posted on MSI's website and it seems great to us, so without further ado here is the well deserved award:

Pros

- Solid performance.
- Surprisingly low power consumption.
- Attractive theme & heatsink designs.
- User-friendly layout.
- 2-Way CrossFireX & 2-Way SLI capability.
- Good SATA II & USB 2.0 connectivity.
- Powered eSATA port.
- Very impressive accessories bundle.
- Very good BLCK & CPU overclocking capabilities.
- Handy onboard V-Check read points.
- Direct OC Base Clock buttons work very well.
- The ability to monitor the temperatures of the individual MOSFETs is pretty neat.
- Official Xeon X3450 support.
- OC Genie auto-overclocking solution produces good results and quickly, but...


Cons

- ...the voltages it sets are too high for our liking.
- Load-Line Calibration (LLC) is broken. (- Oct. 21 '09: No longer applicable, see update above.)
- Software suite is buggy. (- Oct. 21 '09: No longer applicable, see update above.)
- A dual-slot graphics card in the 3rd PCI-E x16 slot will overhang the motherboard.
- Memory overclocking could be a little bit better.

Our thanks to MSI for making this review possible!​

MSI P55-GD80 LGA1156 Motherboard Review‏ Comment Thread​