Published on 10th November 2006 by
Originally Posted by DougEdeyNothing about overclocking?
Originally Posted by DougEdeyadverts
Originally Posted by mclean007some of the graphs have the wrong legend underneath - some of the gaming ones which should say "fps" say "seconds - lower is faster". Aside from that, great review (as usual)!
Originally Posted by Tim SThanks, fixed - I don't know why that wasn't picked up on...
Originally Posted by DougEdeyBindi did it!
Originally Posted by BindibadgiI always mess up the graphs and they take ages to do :'(
Originally Posted by M4RTINsomething i meant find out on, i notice that this board is quad core compatible.. how do we know wether a board will work with kentsfield?, is it any 975X or just some 965's and 975X's
Originally Posted by BUFFAre the mch voltages that you mention the BIOS values or did you meter them?
The guys on XS reckon that there is significant droop (& they have a vmod) where 2.0V in BIOS for mch may only be ~1.8V.
Originally Posted by Tim SThey're actual BIOS values - metered is roughly 0.02 to 0.05V less when I was doing some testing in Taiwan.
Originally Posted by specofdustAch! I'm tired of flicking to page 2 of your reviews and then having to stop there since the layouts are useless. I have a single PCI-E 16x graphics card, a single PCI-E 4x raid card, a PCI soundcard and a PCI wireless card. This means I need at least two usable PCI slots and two usable PCI-E x16 slots(or a x16 and x4).
Originally Posted by Mighty YoshimiIs the audio max interface essentially a PCI-E?
Originally Posted by NatureIntersesting that you didn't compare the 6-quad Gigabyte board in testing. Twas praised so highly by you chaps a couple of weeks ago....
You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.
29th August 2014
© Copyright bit-tech