|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
The Dynamic Duo: Intel's Core 2 Duo E6700 CPU & D975XBX2 Motherboard
Product Category: Motherboard and Processor (CPU)
Manufacturer: Intel
Where to Buy: Amazon.com Motherboard and Processor [Affiliate]
Price: $199 USD (motherboard), $509 USD (processor)
System Requirements: ATX computer case
Specifications: Motherboard specifications, Processor specifications.
Pros- The E6700 Core 2 Duo CPU is incredibly fast;
- Big 4 MB cache on CPU;
- Motherboard has dual 16x PCI Express slots for ATI Crossfire dual GPU support;
- No-fans on the motherboard, everything is passively cooled.
Cons- The E6700 CPU is at the high end of the price/performance ratio, the E6400 is better bang for the buck;
- Motherboard lacks eSATA port, no Firewire 800 either;
- Ugly Viiv software install problems due to lack of proper Vista support;
- Motherboard RAM slots are too close to top PCI Express slot;
- Inconsistant overclocking results.
Summary
Intel turned the tables on AMD last year with the release of their Core 2 Duo processors, taking the performance crown. The Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 is the top-end processor in this line (until you step up to the Extreme processor), and when paired with the Intel D975XBX2 motherboard you get a tantalizing combination of power and speed. How does the combination measure up? I took the motherboard and CPU and had them installed in a case, bought some RAM and other components, then took it all for a spin. This review will focus mostly on the Intel motherboard and CPU rather than the other components.
Read on for the full review!
Motherboard Specifications (or "What's Under The Hood")
The Intel D975XBX2 motheboard is a standard ATX board measuring 12 inches by 9.6 inches in size. The board isn't much to look at - if you want to have a case window showing off a flashy design, this isn't your motherboard - the D975XBX2 is all business. The board supports a staggering array of processors - everything from a lowly Intel Pentium 4 2.8 Ghz up to the jaw-dropping Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 - basically any LGA775 processor. As good as Intel is at making their boards backwards-compatible, I wish they'd design their boards to be more future-compatible. I've had more than one PC that hit the upgrade wall when Intel announced a new socket type and I was unable to upgrade. One can only hope that since the D975XBX2 can support the Quad processors, it will have some long-term compatibility with the entire generation of quad-core CPUs and hopefully even the eight-core processors.
Figure 1: The D975XBX2 motherboard mounted and stocked with parts - minus the video card. Click here for a larger view of the motherboard.
Figure 2: The RAM slots are just a bit too close to the PCI Express slot where the video card goes.
In terms of motherboard specifications, it supports almost everything you'd expect: four RAM slots with support for up to 8 GB of DDR2 800, DDR2 667, or DDR2 533 MHz DIMMs. I tested it with two sticks of 1 GB DDR2 667mhz RAM, and that's all I had for testing so I was unable to see if the motherboard supported 4 GB properly. Windows Vista 32-bit supports the full 4 GB of RAM, but many motherboards top out at 3.5 or even 3 GB. One problem I noticed, as shown in Figure 2, is that the RAM slots are right next to the top PCI Express slot where I installed the ATI video card. This isn't a show-stopper, but it's always a pain to have to uninstall one component in order to install another. I can accept that in a tiny Shuttle XPC, but not in a full-sized system.
The motherboard uses the 975X Express Chipset, which brings with it several specific benefits: Intei Viiv support, 800mhz or system 1066mhz bus (depending on CPU), Intel Memory Pipeline Technology, Intel High Definition Audio (up to eight channels at 192 kHz/32-bit quality), Intel Matrix Storage Technology (allowing for several RAID configurations), 3Gbps SATA, and something I hadn't heard of before called Intel Flex Memory Technology - it allows the use of different memory sizes while still remaining in dual-channel mode.
Figure 3: The back of the system showing the ports. A parallel port? That's so 2002 (at best).
Other specifications for the motherboard include:- ATI CrossFire technology support;
- Legacy I/O controller for diskette drive, serial, parallel, and PS/2* ports;
- Gigabit (10/100/1000 Mbits/sec) LAN subsystem using the Intel� 82573E/82573L Gigabit Ethernet Controller;
- Eight USB 2.0 ports;
- Four Serial ATA interfaces with RAID support (four additional interfaces available with optional discrete RAID controller);
- One parallel ATA IDE interface with UDMA 33, ATA-66/100 support;
- Two PCI slots;
- One six-pin Firewire 400 port;
- Fanless: all the chips are cooled via passive heatsinks, which helps keep the computer quiet;
- Two PCI Express slots.
What's missing? An eSATA port, that's what! External SATA (eSATA) is the fastest way to access external storage, and more external hard drives are starting to support eSATA. Since there's no Firewire 800 port, it's strange that Intel wouldn't have included an eSATA port.
Processor Specifications (or "What's Under The Hood")
The Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 processor runs at 2.66 Ghz on a 1066 mhz system bus and features 4 MB of L2 cache (and 32 kb of L1 cache). Built on the 65nm process, this dual-core processor is a monster performer. I don't have the resources to test every CPU out there, but thankfully the folks at Tom's Hardware Guide have done exactly that with this handy CPU benchmark comparison guide.
Extended Disable Bit is supported on the E6700, though I'm not sure how often that attack vector is used by spyware and virus writers - but more security is better than less. The E6700 also features Intel 64 Architecture, which includes support for 64-bit flat virtual address space, 64-bit pointers, and up to one terabyte (TB) of platform address space. What's that mean in plain English? The CPU is future-proof for 64-bit platforms, but there are still so many compatability problems (and general headaches) with 64-bit Windows XP and Windows Vista that I can't suggest it to anyone unless they have a very specific application scenario where the advantages of 64-bit computing (namely support for 8 GB and up of RAM) can be brought to bear.
Getting back to benchmarks for a moment. As a reviewer, I'm put in the uncomfortable position of not having great tools for benchmarking this CPU: most of the tools for benchmarking CPU and system performance aren't yet Vista-compatible, so I was left with the choice of going with XP to benchmark it properly, or going with Vista and coming up with my own benchmarking methods. Ultimately, since I'm using Vista day to day myself, I chose that route - Vista is here to stay, with almost all new consumer-level computers shipping with it. The second factor is that because I don't review CPUs and motherboards regularly here, ultimately there's not much to compare this CPU to. So instead, I'm going to focus more on real-world performance, how the motherboard and CPU felt in day to day testing, and what the installation and configuration process was like.
What's in the Box
The Intel D975XBX2 motherboard came in an attractive retail box, and out of all the motherboards I've worked with over the years, it had the most comprehensive setup help and guides. There's a well-written 116-page colour manual that breaks down everything about the motherboard in plain English - this is a welcome change from the "Engrish" I've seen in so many manuals from Asus, Abit, and Shuttle over the years. There's also a poster-size fold-out "Integration Guide" that covers all the basics of installing components onto the motherboard. The back of this guide has a life-sized photo of the motherboard with arrows pointing to every component on the board - you don't have to wonder what that port or header on the motherboard is anymore. Intel did a superb job with this guide. A Quick Reference guide has a more detailed visual guide about how to connect each component to the proper spot on the motherboard. There are also several stickers that go on the inside case panel to serve as a reminder of what you're looking at when you open it next - again, a great idea from Intel and not something I've seen before. One thing missing, though, is any documentation related to the BIOS. I looked and looked but couldn't find anything describing some of the BIOS functions, which was quite frustrating.
Other things included in the box: a Serial ATA power cable, a rounded floppy cable (who still uses those?), a rounded ATA-66/100 cable, audio jack covers, four 20 inch-long Serial ATA cables with the very helpful security clips at one end (I've long thought that the person who designed the flimsy, disconnection-prone SATA connector should be pummeled), an I/O shield, a 2x2 to 2x4 power adaptor, and a two-port USB expansion "card" that connects to the motherboard if the four back ports and two front ports aren't enough for you. There are two floppy discs: one with the Intel Matrix RAID drivers, and one with the Marvell SATA controller RAID drivers.
Bundled applications on the "Bonus Applications Software" CD include Diskeeper Home Edition (a defrag program), FarStone RestoreIT Gold (a system-level restore/rollback program), Intervideo MediaOne Gallery (a media browsing program), Intervideo WinDVD (DVD playback), Kapersky Antivirus (in Russian), Kingsoft AntiVirus 2006 (Chinese), Kingsoft Powerword (a multi-lingual dictionary and translation program in Chinese), Norton Antivirus, Norton Internet Security 2006, Ulead Pocket DV Show (a brain-dead easy video camera to DVD burning program), and Ulead VideoStudio 9 SE (a video editing and DVD burning program). I always have mixed feelings about bundled applications - I'm never quite sure which are full versions of the program, which are demos, and which are useful. I'd be more impressed if only one or two programs were included, but they were full versions of useful programs: Photoshop Elements 5? ACDSee 9? Something that a customer could really benefit from, and not something that's so crippled it's almost useless (like many "SE" versions).
There was one serious software problem I couldn't seem to entirely overcome, and strangely enough it involved Intel's own Viiv software suite.
Figure 4: No installation of Intel's Viiv software for you!
The downloadable version of Intel's Viiv software is version 1.6 - but it's only an upgrade, and when you try to install it, you're taken to a Web page explaining in confusing terms that version 1.5 of the Viiv software needs to be installed before 1.6 can be installed. What the Web site doesn't say, however, is how you go about getting version 1.5. I dug around manually on the bundled driver CD - the auto-run program wouldn't work on Vista - and eventually found version 1.5 of the Viiv software inside the drivers folder on the CD.
I manually ran the eisetup.exe file, and after a few moments it gave me a vague error: "An unknown error occured." I next tried installing it with Vista's "recommended settings" (XP legacy mode) and that worked - but then I was presented with an installer that was offering to install chipset drivers, Viiv technology, Intel PRO network connetions software, and Quick Resume technology drivers. Some of these are likely older than the drivers I downloaded from Intel's site (like the chipset installation utility), but what about the Quick Resume Technology driver? I don't think that's on my system at all - nor is the Network Connections Software. I knew that the Viiv Software wasn't on my system, so I tried installing it - I thought it was going to work, but then it coughed out an error simply stating that it failed to complete the installation. So how am I supposed to get the 1.6 update on my system if the 1.5 software won't install? After the install failed I was surprised to see that two other components apparently did install: the Intel Pro Network Connections and Quick Resume Technology Drivers were listed as "Succeeded". The Chipset Installation Utility was listed as "Unknown". After a reboot Windows Update found an update for the Intel Quick Resume drivers. Quick Resume definitely works - from suspend to fully functional takes five seconds.
This situation with the Viiv software is a complete mess. It's understandable that Intel can't have their bundled CDs updated with the 1.6 version of the Viiv software yet, but that means that they should offer a full version of 1.6 on their Web site for Vista owners, something that works smoothly with the Vista drivers people have already downloaded and installed on their systems.
The System I Had Built
I have a confession to make: I've never been particularly good at installing motherboards into cases. I've had a few bad experiences with the process in the past, and when given the choice of paying someone to do it for me or doing it myself, I always opt to get it done by a professional. Once the motherboard is mounted I can attach anything to it - I'm comfortable swapping out CPUs, RAM, etc. In retrospect, given the excellent instructions Intel provided, perhaps I could have done the motherboard install - but I was also travelling a lot in March and wanted to focus on using the system rather than fussing with a motherboard install. I had a local company - Memory Express put it together for me, and they did a great job.
Figure 5: Not the best picture in the world, but just like the Millennium Falcon, it's got it where it counts kid.
Since I was going to use some parts from my then-current workstation - a Shuttle SD11G5 - I ended up swapping out a few things. Here's what the system consisted of in the end:- Lian Li PC-6070B Plus II Silent Aluminum Chassis;
- Zalman CNPS7700-Cu CPU cooler;
- Western Digital Raptox X hard drive (10,000 RPM, 150 GB);
- Maxtor 7200.10 hard drive (7200 RPM, 500 GB);
- 2 x 1 GB Kingston DDR2 667mhz RAM;
- Enermax NoiseTaker II 600 watt power supply;
- ATI Radeon X1950 Pro (256 MB);
- Pioneer A-108 16x DVD burner.
Not all the parts are cutting edge - the Pioneer DVD burner is pushing a year old - but the parts that really matter for day to day performance (CPU, RAM, hard drive, video card) are all up to snuff.
Driver Hunting Easier Than Normal
When installing an operating system on a new PC, the process tends to go like this: install the OS, it boots into a barely functioning mode with most on-board devices not working, then go and seek out all the proper drivers. With Windows Vista, things are quite different. Although I was unable to go all the way up to 1920 x 1200 screen resolution with the default Vista video driver, everything else on the system was working properly immediately after the install - I had Internet access right away, which is a big change from installing Windows XP. Windows Vista has far more drivers available to it than Windows XP, and it makes things much easier. Not surprisingly, the included Intel driver CD wouldn't work in Vista at all - the setup process wouldn't run (see my problems above).
I went to the Intel Web site to seek out the latest drivers, and after I quickly found and downloaded my first driver, I realized something: this was the first Intel motherboard I had ever used. I've always used Asus, Abit, Gigabyte, and Shuttle motherboards - and as a consequence, I've always suffered through their complex Web sites and slow/overloaded download servers. The other day I was looking for updated Vista drivers for an Asus motherboard, and it took me nearly 30 minutes of trying before I was able to download all the drivers. The reason? The Asus FTP servers - all of them - were overloaded with requests and it was nearly impossible for me to get the files I needed. The Intel server, on the other hand, was able to serve up all my downloads on the first try, and usually at speeds nearly 400 KB per second. I downloaded LAN drivers, audio drivers, chipset drivers, the Intel Viiv 1.6 software, and the latest BIOS (only two weeks old at the time of this writing).
Doing a BIOS update on the D975XBX2 was a joy compared to how I've had to do it on other motherboards - Intel offers an ISO download from their site with the updated BIOS on it. If you're not familiar with what an ISO is, basically it's a single image of a whole CD - when you burn the image as a single file using the proper software, the CD will contain all the proper files. In the case of the Intel BIOS ISO, it turned a CD into a bootable disk with the BIOS updating software and the BIOS itself. I rebooted the PC with the CD in the drive, it booted from the CD, and with a couple of keystrokes, I applied the BIOS update. It's unfortunate that Windows Vista doesn't have the ability to burn ISO files to CD - thankfully Intel offers no less than four methods of updating the BIOS (including using a USB Flash drive).
I did notice something peculiar though about the BIOS update: once the update was finished and the machine rebooted, when Windows Vista loaded the ATI video card driver, the ATI software was no longer functioning. I had to uninstall, reboot, and reinstall before it started working again. That's not something I've seen before - a BIOS update breaking video card drivers - but after re-installing the drivers, everything was fine. In retrospect I should have done the BIOS update before installing Vista. It might also be related to this ATI Blue Screen of Death problem that I immediately started having on this system after installing the ATI Catalyst 7.3 drivers.
Day to Day Use
So how does the combination of the Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 CPU and the Intel D975XBX2 motherboard work in day to day tasks? Amazingly well. This machine is fast and incredibly responsive. The install of Windows Vista Ultimate took - get this - 15 minutes from the initial reboot with the CD in the drive to the very last performance benchmark before login. Fifteen minutes to install an OS from scratch? That's impressive no matter how jaded you are.
The Windows Experience Index is a useful way to look at system performance, because every computer running Vista will have a set of five scores. The numbers don't mean much in isolation, but when compared to other systems, they start to give you a good feeling for system performance. At stock speeds after the installation of all drivers, here's how the system measured up:
Figure 5: The Windows Experience Index rating.
I decided to experiment with overclocking the E6700 using the Host Clock Frequency - by default it's set to 266 mhz, and I went up in increments of 5 mhz until I got to 280 mhz - that gave me a CPU speed of 2.80 Ghz by bumping the system bus speed from 1066 mhz up to 1120 mhz. After the bump I ran the Windows Experience Index and the Processor rating inched up to 5.6 and the RAM score went up to 5.6 (from 5.5 and 5.4 respectively).
I wasn't quite ready to give up yet though, because I had read all sorts of stories about how much headroom the E6700 had for overclocking - since it wouldn't boot when the host clock frequency was set to 285 mhz, I tried 300 mhz - and it worked. Bizarre! The CPU was then running at an even 3 Ghz. This is all done without any voltage bump on the CPU - I had a bad experience recently where I burnt out an AMD X2 CPU with a voltage overclock, so I wasn't eager to have a repeat with the Intel E6700.
I tried another bump to 3.2 Ghz but Vista started to crash on boot, so I settled in at 3.102 Ghz. I'll very likely experiment with this further to see how far I can push the CPU and motherboard. One thing is clear, however, there's more performance to be had from this combination. Once I was done overclocking, the Windows Experience Index score for the processor was 5.7 and the RAM was a 5.9. I should point out though that I saw some strange inconsistancies with overclocking: there was more than one occasion where I'd try to push up to 3.2 Ghz, it wouldn't work, then I'd roll back to 3.1 Ghz which was working earlier - and it still wouldn't boot. I'd have to go back to the stock 2.66 Ghz speed before the machine would boot. As I said, further experimentation is in order, because it seems like everyone out there can sail past 3.4 Ghz without much trouble except for me.
To further get a feel for how it will perform in daily tasks, I loaded up Adobe Lightroom with 100 RAW images (828 MB in total) from my Nikon D200. I selected all the images and started a batch "Auto Tone" process - this is almost a purely CPU and RAM-based process, so I think it's a solid indicator of performance. The Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 system crunched through the process in 63 seconds. I also ran Acronis TrueImage from a boot CD that images the hard drive - 13 GB of data in total - creating a 4.8 GB compressed file. Again, this is heavily CPU-dependant task, so I was amazed when it completed in three minutes.
1000 mbps of Blazing Networking Speed...Sort Of
The on-board gigabit Ethernet port is a bit of a mystery: I benchmarked transferring a 6 GB file from the Intel D975XBX2 to another machine on my LAN with an NVIDIA nForce gigabit Ethernet port (with a Netgear gigabit hub in the middle), and it maxed out at 48.9 MB per second when pulling down the file from the other computer - nice and fast (though 391 mbps is still a far cry from 1000 mbps). However, when moving that same 6 GB file (with the name changed) from the Intel D975XBX2 machine to the other machine, the transfer proceeded at a painful 2 MB per second. After a reboot I tried again and still only managed to get 7.62 MB per second. I tried reversing the approach: I initiated the transfer of the file from the other machine, pulling the 6 GB file from the Intel D975XBX2 machine. The results were much better, with speeds of 37.3 MB per second.
This was turning into a real head-scratcher, so I then tried copying the file from the Intel D975XBX2 machine a Windows XP-based Shuttle SN95G5 computer with a 100 mbps Ethernet port. I saw speeds of just over 10 MB per second, which is normal for a 100 mbps port. Not having another Windows Vista-based computer with a gigabit Ethernet port with which to test, I can only conclude one of two things: it's either some sort of conflict between the Intel Pro 1000 NIC and the NVIDIA nForce NIC, or it might be a driver-related issue. Either way, it's annoying that I'm going to have to initiate transfers to the Intel D975XBX2 machine from another machine. Things grew a bit more curious when I used the included StressTest by PassMark Software to do a 100% system-wide test: the network test had 48 errors with a description of "bad packet: checksum incorrect". That's 48 bad packets out of well over one million, so statistically it's not critical, but it's still curious.
All in All....
I'm impressed with the combination of the Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 CPU and the Intel D975XBX2 motherboard: the CPU is very fast, easily beating out comparable AMD offerings, and the motherboard is functional and flexible. It's worth pointing out that a couple of years ago, having any sort of overclocking options on an Intel motherboard was an impossibility - so the changes that Intel made regarding this policy and the options they give an enthusiast on the D975XBX2 motherboard are appreciated. Other than a missing eSATA port, I can't fault the motherboard for much of anything. I'm surprised there was no manual detailing all the BIOS options, but ultimately forum searches on hardcore hardware sites allow you to found out anything you want. The combination of these two products is tough to beat, and I'd have no hesitation reccomending them to anyone looking for a fast, stable system.
Jason Dunn owns and operates Thoughts Media Inc., a company dedicated to creating the best in online communities. He enjoys mobile devices, digital media content creation/editing, and pretty much all technology. He lives in Calgary, Alberta, Canada with his lovely wife, and his sometimes obedient dog. He wishes overclocking was less black-art-voodoo.
|
Threaded Mode
