Archive Home arrow Reviews: arrow Motherboards arrow ASRock AOD790GX/128M AM2+ Motherboard
ASRock AOD790GX/128M AM2+ Motherboard E-mail
Reviews - Featured Reviews: Motherboards
Written by Bruce Normann - Edited by Olin Coles   
Tuesday, 10 March 2009
Table of Contents: Page Index
ASRock AOD790GX/128M AM2+ Motherboard
ASRock AMD 790 Features
AOD790GX/128M Specifications
Closer Look: AOD790GX/128M
AMD 790GX Detailed Features
AOD790GX/128M Component Layout
AOD790GX/128M BIOS
Motherboard Testing Methodology
3DMark06 Benchmarks
PCMark05 Benchmarks
CINEBENCH Release 10 Tests
Crysis Benchmark Results
EVEREST Benchmark Results
AOD790GX/128M Power Consumption
ASRock Final Thoughts
ASRock AOD790GX/128M Conclusion

PCMark05 Results

Using synthetic benchmarks to compare one product to another has some distinct advantages when testing similar hardware, yet I have never found myself completely satisfied by the process. I have come to understand that they're important for comparing "apples to apples", and that the results are usually very consistent. But as with any synthetic benchmark, the numbers can often mean very little more than just numbers. We don't take a high score on a synthetic benchmark to mean that a product will/should perform well, and neither should you. The difference between projected performance and actual performance is the difference between fire and the fire-fly.

PCMark is a series of computer benchmark tools developed by Futuremark. The tools are designed to test the performance of the user's CPU, read/write speeds of RAM and hard drives. We have used these tests to simulate a battery of applications and tasks, which will produce results we can compare to other systems using similar hardware.

After a series of five looped tests, the averages of the results are charted below. Keep in mind that the AOD790GX/128M as well as the Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3P shared the same GPU and SSD (specified in the Test Methodology section). The idea here was to isolate the motherboard and CPU components to determine if one product and platform performed better than the other. I am also reporting different CPU clock settings for the AOD790GX/128M and Phenom II 720BE to show performance scaling with a typical overclock situation.

PCMarkSys.jpg

The PCMark05 System Suite benchmark results start to show some differences across the test systems. This test shows the influence of the CPU and the memory architecture on system performance. The chipsets and CPU are different, the memory, SSD and video card are the same. In the article on the GA-EP45-UD3P we saw that there's very little difference in performance between motherboards when the same hardware is used with the same settings. Obviously, we're seeing something completely different here. The X3 takes full advantage of its "extra" core to beat up on the Intel Core2 Duo, once it is overclocked to similar CPU speeds. Core-for-core and clock-for-clock, the C2D may be a more efficient computing machine, but $-for-$, the Phenom II X3 wins out.

PCMark05 offers a CPU benchmark suite, with several processor intensive tests combined, to focus on raw CPU processing power. The CPU benchmark suite includes the following tests:

• File Compression
• File Decompression
• File Encryption
• File Decryption
• Image Decompression
• Audio Compression
• File Compression
• File Encryption
• File Decompression
• File Decryption
• Audio Decompression
• Image Decompression

PCMarkCPU.jpg

Using the combined test performance to create an artificial score, PCMark05 generates a score called CPU Marks. Taking away most of the outside influence from our testing, and concentrating on CPU-only benchmarks, the song remains the same. It's tough for the dual core CPU to compete with the gang of three; at equal clock rates, the Phenom II X3 beats the Core2 Duo by 36%.

Of the many tests inside the CPU suite, lets look at one of the benchmarks with the largest performance difference. The Audio Compression benchmark test measures performance with synthetic encoding, and the Phenom II X3 pulls ahead by 1158 KBps, once again, a 36% lead. If you're encoding a lot of MP3s, this is a nice, useable performance increase.



 

Comments 

 
# 790 GX chipset MBpawan 2010-08-08 10:09
790 GX chipset with ATI radeon HD 3300 IGP is even today a very good.
Unlike the reports in this review, this mobo can handle most of the current games at decent playable frame rates with great ease. Any one has clarifications can approach me to clear his/her doubts.
Report Comment
 
 
# Wrong.Olin Coles 2010-08-08 13:46
You are absolutely wrong, pawan. The ATI Radeon HD 3300 IGP will not play "most" current games "at decent playable frame rates with great ease". This mobile graphics chip is not capable of any DirectX-11 games, which is what qualifies as current these days, and it struggles with DX10 extensions. Even on the games it will play, you must turn the settings all the way down and play at reduced resolutions.

The ATI radeon HD 3300 IGP is not intended for modern 3D games, and it's best used for low-impact 3D applications.
Report Comment
 
 
# Examples, PleaseBruceBruce 2010-08-08 10:34
Can you provide some benchmarks with the HD 3300 IGP and the current games you mention?
Report Comment
 

Comments have been disabled by the administrator.

Search Benchmark Reviews
QNAP Network Storage Servers

Follow Benchmark Reviews on FacebookReceive Tweets from Benchmark Reviews on Twitter