Test Setup
The Biostar TA690G AM2 was selected as our AMD 690G platform representative today. This choice does not indicate any perceivable performance differences that we have noticed when comparing it against the MSI K9AGM2 or ASUS M2A-VM boards; rather it was chosen after blindly pulling its name tag out of the lab hat. All three boards will be fully reviewed in our mATX roundup next week. At this time, each one offers basically the same base performance with features and pricing differentiating the boards from each other. The MSI feature list is very streamlined but still offers on-board HDMI output along with a price tag that should be south of $80. The ASUS and Biostar offerings are feature rich with price tags that will be around $85 and up. Performance and more importantly stability is excellent in all three boards.
Our first decision was to decide what chipsets to test against. The natural comparison is the NVIDIA GeForce 6150 chipset that has ruled the AMD IGP market for well over a year now. We selected one of the better overall 6150 boards from a feature viewpoint, which is the ASUS M2NPV-VM. There was not enough time to compare the AMD 690G chipset to the current VIA and SIS AM2 offerings as these new products just arrived and we will look at them in the near future.
Our next decision and one that we typically do not do in our normal motherboard reviews was to test the board against a similar board offering but utilizing a different CPU manufacturer. AMD has been adamant that the combination of the 690G/690V chipset and AM2 processor is meant to provide an overall superior platform experience when compared against the Intel G965/Q965 with a Core 2 Duo processor. Of course, they also mean this when comparing their chipset against the NVIDIA products but at least with every NVIDIA AM2 chipset sold, there is a corresponding AMD processor requirement. In the end we chose the MSI G965MDH for our Intel G965 platform offering.
We selected the AMD Athlon 64 5200+ X2 and the Intel E6300 Core 2 Duo processors as our processor choices as both represent great bargains when comparing price against performance in their respective categories. We also switched to Microsoft Vista Home Premium 32-bit as our operating system of choice for this category. After speaking with several of the larger OEMs who are using this chipset and similar ones, we found out this OS choice will be the one most widely offered to consumers. It was a natural then that we would test on Vista Home Premium and a 2GB memory configuration as we suggest this amount as a minimum for Vista.
Our memory and hard drive choices are a little out of the norm for this category but since we are testing the chipset capabilities we were determined not to have a bottleneck in either area. We will test additional budget DDR2-800 memory from G.Skill and Wintec in our roundup along with comparison testing using an external video card. All other components in our test configurations are identical with the boards being set up in their default configurations except for memory settings being optimized to ensure maximum throughput on each board.
Overclocking, network, audio, and memory performance on individual boards will be covered in our mATX roundup. We will say that overclocking on the 690G platforms is in its infancy at this time as the initial BIOS releases concentrated on compatibility and base performance, not overclocking. We have received a performance oriented BIOS for the Biostar and ASUS boards that should allow overclocking now.
Our choice of software applications to test was based on programs that enjoy widespread use and produce repeatable and consistent results during testing. Microsoft Vista has thrown a monkey wrench into testing as the aggressive nature of the operating system to constantly optimize application loading and retrieval from memory or the storage system presented some interesting obstacles. This along with the lack of driver maturity will continue to present problems in the near future with benchmark selections. Our normal process was to change our power settings to performance, delete the contents of the Prefetch folder, and then reboot after each benchmark run. A lengthy process to be sure but one that resulted in consistency over the course of benchmark testing. All applications were run with administrator privileges.
The Biostar TA690G AM2 was selected as our AMD 690G platform representative today. This choice does not indicate any perceivable performance differences that we have noticed when comparing it against the MSI K9AGM2 or ASUS M2A-VM boards; rather it was chosen after blindly pulling its name tag out of the lab hat. All three boards will be fully reviewed in our mATX roundup next week. At this time, each one offers basically the same base performance with features and pricing differentiating the boards from each other. The MSI feature list is very streamlined but still offers on-board HDMI output along with a price tag that should be south of $80. The ASUS and Biostar offerings are feature rich with price tags that will be around $85 and up. Performance and more importantly stability is excellent in all three boards.
| Biostar TA690G AM2 / ASUS M2NPV-VM Testbed | |
| Processor: | AMD Athlon 64 X2 5200+ Windsor Dual Core, 2.6GHz, 2 x 1MB L2 Cache, 13x Multiplier |
| CPU Voltage: | 1.350V |
| Cooling: | Zalman 9500 Air Cooling |
| Power Supply: | Corsair CMPSU-620HX 620W |
| Memory: | OCZ Flex XLC PC2-6400 (2x1GB) (ProMOS Memory Chips) |
| Memory Settings: | 3-4-4-9, 1.90V |
| Video Cards: | On-Board X1250, GeForce 6150 |
| Video Drivers: | AMD 8.345, NVIDIA 15.00 |
| Hard Drive: | Western Digital 74GB 10,000RPM SATA 16MB Buffer Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 500GB SATA 16MB Buffer |
| Optical Drives: | Plextor PX-760A, PX-B900A |
| Case: | Cooler Master CM Stacker 830 |
| Operating System: | Windows Vista Home Premium 32-bit |
| . | |
| MSI G965MDH Testbed | |
| Processor: | Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 Dual Core, 1.86GHz, 2MB Unified Cache 1066FSB, 7x Multiplier |
| CPU Voltage: | 1.3250V |
| Cooling: | Zalman 9500 Air Cooling |
| Power Supply: | Corsair CMPSU-620HX 620W |
| Memory: | OCZ Flex XLC PC2-6400 (2x1GB) (ProMOS Memory Chips) |
| Memory Settings: | 4-4-4-12 1.85V |
| Video Cards: | On-board X3000 |
| Video Drivers: | Intel 15.1 |
| Hard Drive: | Western Digital 74GB 10,000RPM SATA 16MB Buffer Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 500GB SATA 16MB Buffer |
| Optical Drives: | Plextor PX-760A, PX-B900A |
| Case: | Cooler Master CM Stacker 830 |
| Operating System: | Windows Vista Home Premium 32-bit |
| . | |
Our first decision was to decide what chipsets to test against. The natural comparison is the NVIDIA GeForce 6150 chipset that has ruled the AMD IGP market for well over a year now. We selected one of the better overall 6150 boards from a feature viewpoint, which is the ASUS M2NPV-VM. There was not enough time to compare the AMD 690G chipset to the current VIA and SIS AM2 offerings as these new products just arrived and we will look at them in the near future.
Our next decision and one that we typically do not do in our normal motherboard reviews was to test the board against a similar board offering but utilizing a different CPU manufacturer. AMD has been adamant that the combination of the 690G/690V chipset and AM2 processor is meant to provide an overall superior platform experience when compared against the Intel G965/Q965 with a Core 2 Duo processor. Of course, they also mean this when comparing their chipset against the NVIDIA products but at least with every NVIDIA AM2 chipset sold, there is a corresponding AMD processor requirement. In the end we chose the MSI G965MDH for our Intel G965 platform offering.
We selected the AMD Athlon 64 5200+ X2 and the Intel E6300 Core 2 Duo processors as our processor choices as both represent great bargains when comparing price against performance in their respective categories. We also switched to Microsoft Vista Home Premium 32-bit as our operating system of choice for this category. After speaking with several of the larger OEMs who are using this chipset and similar ones, we found out this OS choice will be the one most widely offered to consumers. It was a natural then that we would test on Vista Home Premium and a 2GB memory configuration as we suggest this amount as a minimum for Vista.
Our memory and hard drive choices are a little out of the norm for this category but since we are testing the chipset capabilities we were determined not to have a bottleneck in either area. We will test additional budget DDR2-800 memory from G.Skill and Wintec in our roundup along with comparison testing using an external video card. All other components in our test configurations are identical with the boards being set up in their default configurations except for memory settings being optimized to ensure maximum throughput on each board.
Overclocking, network, audio, and memory performance on individual boards will be covered in our mATX roundup. We will say that overclocking on the 690G platforms is in its infancy at this time as the initial BIOS releases concentrated on compatibility and base performance, not overclocking. We have received a performance oriented BIOS for the Biostar and ASUS boards that should allow overclocking now.
Our choice of software applications to test was based on programs that enjoy widespread use and produce repeatable and consistent results during testing. Microsoft Vista has thrown a monkey wrench into testing as the aggressive nature of the operating system to constantly optimize application loading and retrieval from memory or the storage system presented some interesting obstacles. This along with the lack of driver maturity will continue to present problems in the near future with benchmark selections. Our normal process was to change our power settings to performance, delete the contents of the Prefetch folder, and then reboot after each benchmark run. A lengthy process to be sure but one that resulted in consistency over the course of benchmark testing. All applications were run with administrator privileges.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
70 Comments
View All Comments
Gary Key - Wednesday, March 7, 2007 - link
The board will not do 1080P over the HDMI port at this time. 720P is working fine. The mATX will be up on the 19th, provided my heart is still working by that time, have to say that testing under Vista is not a pleasant experience. ;)dmce - Friday, March 9, 2007 - link
Gary, thanks for the info. Is the lack of ability to do 1080p related to Vista or will it just not do it at this stage. Is it likely bios/driver updates will improve this?chucky2 - Thursday, March 8, 2007 - link
Man, to me it sounds like - other than having video and audio in one cable - HDMI is not the way to go.Better to have DVI w/ HDCP it sounds like...plus, the connector is more beefcake, no falling out accidentally with DVI.
Chuck
Gary Key - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 - link
The platform will no do 1080P playback at this time in a consistent matter. As stated, we normally would end up with a slide show or a blank screen. AMD has told us 1080P will be possible with a driver update, proper playback support (PowerDVD or WinDVD), and a processor along the lines of a 5200+. We received a new driver update to address video quality issues we found late in testing but 1080P was not addressed yet. I am just as anxious as everyone else to see if it will do 1080P. ;)savantu - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 - link
This has to be one of the worst review ever done at Anandtech , almost makes you think somebody was paid to do it this bad.we fully believe the majority of the performance difference lies in the chipset selection.
Is this a joke or what ? The 2.6GHz 5200+ against a 1.86GHz Core 2 in media encoding and you think it is the chipset?! Every other test you made put the E6300 in between the 3800+ and 4200+.
goinginstyle - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 - link
Have you ever run a Conroe on a VIA or 945P chipset, if you have then you know what was meant by his statement.JarredWalton - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 - link
Try reading it in context:Nero Recode 2 performance:
AnyDVD Rip = 3-way tie more or less
Shrink = 6150 leads, G965 second, 690G last (despite 6150 and 690G using the same CPU)
Shrink/Burn = G965 first, 6150 and 690G virtually tied.
Full quote, instead of your selected text: "Of course, we are using a mid-range AM2 processor against the budget C2D part (the AMD price cuts have helped matters there, as the price difference is currently only about $35) but we fully believe the majority of the performance difference lies in the chipset selection. It is only in the shrink and burn tests that we see the Intel platform flexing its muscles...."
In other words, the difference we saw in the Shrink test indicates that the 6150 chipset is better for this task than 690G. We definitely know that the Core 2 Duo is faster at equivalent CPU prices than X2 chips, but we're looking at platforms and chipsets and not just CPUs.
UserNO - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 - link
Gawd, people, if you're going to tell us that we'll "have to play at 800x600" if we use these integrated graphics, why not test the games at 800x600 and report framerates? Find the highest (lowest) settings necessary to get a playable experience and tell us that. No one's going to run a game at 1024x768, get 15fps, and then give up; they're going to crank the settings and res down until they can play the game.It's not enough to just say "integrated graphics are unsuitable for even casual gamers, buy a discrete card" and then not quantify the difference.
Gary Key - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 - link
We tested the games at 800x600 and the results will be in our mATX roundup along with dedicated video scores.In the meantime-
800x600- HQ settings
690G 6150 G965
BF2 20.68 17.4 DNF
HL2 35.7 28.8 5.3
CoH 26.4 21.7 24.9
Calin - Wednesday, March 7, 2007 - link
I just wanted to say I'm looking forward to the mATX roundupNice article overall, thanks. And you might want to invest in some cheap Intel and AMD processors (the low-end, for $100 both), just to be able to compare them (I'm not suggesting complete testings on every processor possible)