GIGABYTE 870A-UD3 AM3 Motherboard Review

[SKYMTL]

General Task Benchmarks

General Task Benchmarks

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.

x264 HD Benchmark

x264 HD Benchmark v3.0
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.

WinRAR

WinRAR 3.9.3
Test: WinRAR Benchmark
Comparison: MB/s

WinRAR is one of the most popular file compression/decompression tools. It is a great benchmark for the CPU, Memory, and Hard Drive subsystems.

We see again that the performance scores scale linearly with the number of cores on the CPU. These multi-threaded system benchmarks can fully utilize the power of the Phenom X6 1090T.

 

[raxen]

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 multiple instances of SuperPi via the HyperPi 0.99b interface - one per each core. The final time is calculated by averaging the times from all instances.

Cinebench R11.5 64-bit

Comparison: Generated Score

Developed by MAXON, creators of Cinema 4D, Cinebench 11 is designed using the popular Cinema software and created to compare system performance in 3D Animation and Photo applications. The CPU test makes use of up to 16 CPUs/Cores, and renders a realistic photo while utilizing various CPU-intensive features such as reflection, ambient occlusion, area lights and procedural shaders.

 

[raxen]

Gaming Benchmarks

Gaming Benchmarks

Futuremark 3DMark06

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

Test: Full Test
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, and it will undoubtedly be used for years to come.

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.

Crysis

Crysis Benchmark Tool 1.05
Resolution: 1024x768
Anti Aliasing: None
Quality Settings: Low
Global Settings: DX10

Test 1: CPU Benchmark
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.

S.T.A.L.K.E.R - Call of Pripyat

S.T.A.L.K.E.R: Call of Pripyat Benchmark Tool
Resolution: 1024x768
Graphics Preset: Low
Renderer: Enhanced Full Dynamic Lighting (DX11)

When it was first released, the latest STALKER game was hailed for its use of DX11 but people quickly realized for all its bluster, the graphics were decidedly mediocre at the best of times. Nonetheless, the stand-alone benchmark that was released prior to the game’s North American debut is still used by many people due to its comprehensive interface and seemingly consistent results.

Left 4 Dead 2

Left 4 Dead 2 (Latest Update as of June 13, 2010)
Resolution: 1024x768
Film Grain: Default
Anti-Aliasing Mode: None
Filtering: Bilinear
Graphic Settings: Low
Shader Detail: Low
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Left 4 Dead 2 is the second installment of the latest disorienting, fast-paced zombie apocalypse mega-hit from Valve. L4D2 uses the latest version of the Source engine with enhancements such as multi-core processor support and physics-based animation. For benching, we used a pre-recorded 5 minute timedemo taken on the Dead Center campaign during the Hotel mission.

In this section, we benchmarked at low resolutions and low quality graphic settings to ensure that the differences in scores were due to the CPU. Through 3DMark06 and 3DMark Vantage, we saw a noticeable increase in performance as the number of cores on the CPU went up. However, in all the games that were tested, our results showed that the X6 processor only offered a negligible increase in FPS over the X2 and X4 configurations. Also factor in that these benchmarks were done with the lowest quality graphic settings and it becomes easy to see that gaming performance is really not dependent on the CPU.

 

[raxen]

Motherboard Temperature Testing

Motherboard Temperature Testing

Almost every overclocker out there will know that keeping temperatures in check plays an important role in overall system stability. When you are pushing for those extreme clock speeds, it is not only vital to keep your CPU and your RAM cool, but it is equally as important to keep motherboard components frosty as well.

In this section, we investigate just how hot motherboard components can get on the GIGABYTE 870A-UD3.

For our test setup, we will place the motherboard on our open-air test bench and aim a 120mm 800RPM fan so that the airflow will be travelling parallel to the northbridge and southbridge heatsink fins. This is done to simulate air movement inside a case. Room ambient temperatures are kept at a constant 22°C.

We will attach our K-type thermocouple to various components of the motherboard and record the temperature of those parts.

Temperature readings will be taken at 2 stages: Idle, and 100% Load.

Idle readings are taken after a cold boot of the computer followed by 30 minutes of idling.

100% Load settings are taken 5 minutes after the simultaneous start of a Prime95 Blend test and an infinitely looped Crysis GPU test.

For these tests, we will use the AMD Phenom II X6 1090T processor with the following voltage settings:

This processor is overclocked to 4.0GHz by increasing the CPU multiplier. If you had read the overclocking section of this review, then you would recall that we stopped our overclocking endeavours at 4.0GHz, 1.45v Vcore. The results below should explain why we were reluctant to push any higher.

Without a heatsink, the phase circuit MOSFETs reached a scorching 87°C (surface temperature) under 100% load. Nonetheless, the system was rock-solid stable and passed 13 hours of torture testing. We tried to push our chip higher to 4.1GHz. Unfortunately, the system never stabilized and the MOSFETs reached almost 100°C at a CPU voltage of 1.50v. For those readers who are looking to push their CPUs and the 870A-UD3 to the limit, be sure to place a fan over the MOSFETs to keep them properly cooled.

 

[raxen]

Conclusion

Conclusion

GIGABYTE has brought forth the 870A-UD3 as an offering to all budget-conscious computer enthusiasts who want the newest technologies. Supporting all AM3 CPUs and sporting the new 870/SB850 chipset combo, this $110 motherboard definitely packs a punch with its impressive set of features that are commonly found in higher end motherboards.

In terms of its impressive feature set, the GIGABYTE 870A-UD3 offers its users an 8+2 phase power delivery circuit, SATA 6Gbps support, USB 3.0 capabilities, and even the ability to charge the batteries of your electronics when your computer is turned off. In our testing, it was also a very capable motherboard for users overclocking CPUs with locked multipliers as it reached a whopping bus speed of 336MHz using stock voltages and cooling. Most importantly, however, is its out-of-the-box support for unlocking the hidden cores in some Athlon II and Phenom II processors. We feel this is the perfect “value” added solution to this board and budget AMD processors in general even though the unlocking capabilities of CPUs is hardly guaranteed.

While the 870A-UD3 does have many good features, there were some shortcomings that need to be addressed. Firstly, there are problems with the current fan header layout as there is no dedicated header for a rear exhaust fan. Furthermore, placing the clear CMOS header underneath the PCI-E x16 slot makes it cumbersome to access when a video card is installed. Last but not least, and perhaps the Achilles heel of the board is the lack of a MOSFET heatsink. Through our testing at a CPU voltage of 1.45v, we recorded MOSFET temperatures which were quite high considering the relatively low ambient temperatures. Trying to get the motherboard to stabilize at higher voltages proved to be impossible without placing a high speed fan over the area to keep the MOSFETs cooled.

Yes we are being a bit overly critical here since it is important to remember that the GIGABYTE 870A-UD3 is a low-end motherboard that is targeted at budget-conscious consumers. The problems with the fan header layout and the MOSFET heatsink are all addressed in the 870A-UD3’s more expensive and higher end brethren. The purpose of the 870A-UD3 is to provide users with the newly introduced SATA 6Gbps and USB 3.0 technologies along with absolute stability and very good overclocking / unlocking potential at an affordable price. In this respect, it fits the bill perfectly.

Overall, we were impressed that GIGABYTE was able to pack so many features into the 870A-UD3 at such a low price and as such it definitely deserves our “DAM GOOD VALUE” award.


Pros:

• Affordable price!
• SATA 6Gbps support
• USB 3.0 functionality
• 8+2 phase power delivery circuit
• Extremely overclockable bus speed – definite plus for non-BE CPU owners
• Copper PCB layer and solid capacitors on the entire motherboard
• 3-year warranty
• Dual BIOS chips for redundancy
• Neat innovative feature of charging USB devices even when computer is turned off or in sleep mode

Cons:

• Lack of MOSFET cooler limits stable voltage regulation and overclocking
• Poor CMOS header location
• No rear fan header

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...d3-am3-motherboard-review-comment-thread.html​