Asus P4G8x Review

For discussions related to the main web site or the forum itself are now combined into one to clean things up a bit..

Asus P4G8x Review

Postby sockman » Tue Feb 04, 2003 7:13 pm

What is up with that Asus P4g8x review. That reviewer needs to be fired or something because it was obviously not done right. There is no way the performance of this board was behind the Gigabyte board. I have read many many reviews on this board and this is the first one that I have come across that puts it way behind the Gigabyte board. For example see Tomshardware - a new roundup on Granite Bays was done 2/4/03 that shows it ahead of the Gigabyte on most of the tests. Please have Doc Overclock do the tests again and make sure it is a proper comparison this time.


Sockman
sockman
Pilgrim
Pilgrim
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2003 7:00 pm

Postby Tulatin » Wed Feb 05, 2003 1:56 pm

hmmm... it seems like Nisto has seen better days - that being said, Valour has also noticed this little problem... The scores are terribnle - surely dual channel DDR must not have been enabled. Let the denziens of this board know trhat the P4G8X review is a dud, and we shouldpetition to have it re-done
Tulatin
Enlightened Master
Enlightened Master
 
Posts: 14664
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 2:29 pm
Location: Canada

Postby Valour » Wed Feb 05, 2003 2:10 pm

Unfortunately most reviewers think that they're gods who write the review once and then pass it off as gospel even if it turns out to be totally wrong. What's so hard about rewriting it or printing a quick update if you find out more about the board?

I wish they'd take both the P4G8X AND the 8INXP reviews down and re-review both boards using the retail box editions so that we can get some accurate benchmarks. Nobody cares about the theororetical performance of a prototype motherboard...

-Jem
"The proverb says that Providence protects children and idiots. This is really true. I know because I have tested it." -Mark Twain

I wrote this book: www.herotale.com
And here's the next one: www.emeraldblackbird.com
Valour
Black Belt 2nd Degree
Black Belt 2nd Degree
 
Posts: 2893
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2002 6:24 pm
Location: Rochester, NY USA

Postby the_chaos_factor » Sat Feb 22, 2003 9:38 pm

On the P48GX review. Could anyone confirm that the test was conducted with a SINGLE SDRAM stick? This would in effect prevent the tester from seeing any improvement realized from increased memory bandwidth.
the_chaos_factor
Pilgrim
Pilgrim
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2003 9:33 pm

Postby Doc Overclock » Sat Mar 15, 2003 2:45 am

Niso tested with both RAM slots filled and with only one stick as well the performance was tested using two 128MB Corsair chips. And no Valour us reviewers do not think we are gods as there is only one God. The board Niso reviewed was the Retail version and I did retest it and it sucked maybe a bad board sure anything is possible but I reran the tests and the board was way slower than the Gigabyte 8INXP. I used the Gigabyte in my system not the ASUS. Just because you do not agree with a review does not mean the review is not right. Strong words like someone should be fired is way out of line and perspective. :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:
Doc Overclock - Adventures In Electricity
Doc Overclock
Lord Of The Realm
 
Posts: 3328
Joined: Thu May 25, 2000 12:01 am
Location: Star Fleet Academy

Postby the_chaos_factor » Mon Mar 17, 2003 10:43 pm

Anyone can run a test. It takes more expertise to interpret the results, or to assess whether there may be a problem with the testing methodology or system. What people are having a hard time with is reconciling the differences in performance conclusions that motherboard.org reached vs say tom's hardware. Now, your response clarifies the differences in testing methodology, but fails to provide any useful conclusion to the reader regarding the differences in performance findings. Like, the one mem stick test performed no better than the two stick test, this may show that our benchmark tests do not rely on memory bandwidth for performnace, or that that the ASUS GB implementation fails to deliver additional memory bandwidth. Now, you may (as most) decide that your findings and relative rankings stand on their own merit in isolation, but you are missing a chance to understand a) why your 8INXP board performs better than the one at Tom's, or why the P48GX at Tom's performs better than the one you tested.
the_chaos_factor
Pilgrim
Pilgrim
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2003 9:33 pm

Postby Toby B. » Tue Mar 18, 2003 1:49 am

Niso wrote:There are two flavors of this motherboard. The Deluxe version includes Serial ATA Raid, Firewire and Gigabit Ethernet options. We reviewed the deluxe version.

But when we like to give an editors choice we have to decide if it is the best. Unfortunately even the Asus P4PE desktop motherboard was better than this motherboard. The Gigabyte 8INXP motherboard was the best.

What holds this motherboard back? The Ergonomics was not so good. Some of the enthusiasts told me they can't use this motherboard because there is no IDE Raid. There is only Serial ATA Raid and Serial ATA drives are not on the market yet. Nobody likes to pay for a RAID adapter or Serial ATA to IDE converter which may cause instability. Gigabyte has both RAID solutions.


http://www.motherboards.org/articlesd/m ... 229_2.html


High performance and generous equipment at a premium price are available this time again from Asus. Specifically, the additional features could be better integrated - three modules for the slot bracket are too many for us. Otherwise, it gets only good grades.


http://www.tomshardware.com/mainboard/2 ... 05-07.html

hmmm. Sounds to me like the same determination from either review. I found nowhere on the Tom's Hardware review that clearly stated that this was a problem/issue free board.
Toby B.
Lead Mobo-fu Master
Lead Mobo-fu Master
 
Posts: 14277
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Maine

Postby the_chaos_factor » Fri Mar 21, 2003 6:58 pm

My comment was in reference to performance. Of the 25 tests that Toms ran, only about 4 or 5 had the 8INXP board beating out the P4G8X. On motherboards.org testing, as far as I can tell, the P4G8X showed poor performance relative to 8INXP (and many other boards for that matter), hence the 15 performance points for the 8INXP and only 9 for the P48GX. Because of the way you present the performnace results, its difficult to determine exactly how any two boards compare against each other in each test. Using your global ranking scheme, mb.org and toms come to different performance conclusions. However, I will present a possible interpretation. It appears that the tests which rely on memory bandwidth or are otherwise memory intensive operations run slower on the P48GX, whether these operations are processor or graphics memory loads. One might conclude that ASUS's GB implementation is not upto that of the 8INXP. To investige this, one can review those specific tests that rely on memory bandwidth. If I had access to these boards to test them, I would run more synthetic tests to prove this out. Since memory bendwidth is THE reason for Granite Bay in the first place, it is disappointing that the ASUS implementation appears to be slower in this regard. While relative slowness is small, it seems to have a more significant impact on certain applications. This confuses the matter however and may mean that in fact, something else is going on, perhaps one of the 5 or so different memory clock options were set differently? There is also the the probably impact that different processor speeds can have on the performance results, using a relatively slow processor as to whats available today, can be misleading, since manfacturers will strive to make things best with whats currently at the market front. This may cause slowness or unexpected results in with other combinations of system components. Lastly, the fact that both mb.org and toms seems to have missed the graphics incompatibility is troubling. As the owner of a Asus P5A/AGP setup at one time, system stability issues related to graphics operation are totally unacceptable. In general, I find the reviews useful. mb.org is a little sparse in the test setup description. I'd also like to be able to compare two or more boards in every test that was run. I'd also like to see the boards outfitted with the fast memory/processors, with bios memory settings pushed appropriately
without overclocking the FSB, and see how things stack up against each other.
the_chaos_factor
Pilgrim
Pilgrim
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2003 9:33 pm

Postby ben2207 » Fri Mar 21, 2003 7:11 pm

Doc is moving the standard test system to a P4 2.8 GHz rig for Motherboards.org soon

Ben
ben2207
Green Belt
Green Belt
 
Posts: 170
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2002 1:04 pm

Postby bbo_122900 » Mon Apr 14, 2003 2:12 am

I'm thinking to buy P4S8X-X. What are the differences between P4S8X and P4S8X-X? Any recommendation?
Thanks
bbo_122900
Pilgrim
Pilgrim
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2003 2:07 am

Next

Return to Motherboards.org Web Site

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests