[H] review of Abit IP-35 Pro

A

arman01

Gawd
Joined
Feb 9, 2005
Messages
759
just wanted to point out that this motherboard is DDR2 based, and not DDR3 as is stated in the review about 20 times.

Also i must say that although it was a decent attempt at a review it did fall short of [H]'s usual review standards.

discuss...
 
Yeah I was really confused as well, I even went to the abit site to see if they had a DDR3 version and couldn't find one.
 
The Multiplier Factor option controls the base CPU ratio, but has no effect for multiplier locked CPUs.
Click to expand...

Huh ? I would be astounded (but not for the first time) if this did not allow the mullitpler to be adjusted downward as is the case with most if not all current top tier enthusiast boards.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE test all motherboards with a 4x 1GB ram setup, a quick look at the forums eliminates any need for a explaination. (both at default and with manuf advertised timings @ manuf voltage ) The use of Vista 64 ensures that sooner or later the user will probally populate all 4 slots. I see you used 4GB but am not sure of the configuration. Hell it you have it laying around go 4 x 2GB if the board claims to support 8GB.

Somewhere in the database "troubles" I think we lost the "What would you like to see in a Motherboard review thread" .

The richness of the bios settings, say compared to a Gigabyte, was covered well in the article but perhaps deserved a comment in the conclusion, its the richest in temp monitoring/alarms and fan settings is the best I have ever seen. The fan control, temp, and GTL level settings not to mention actually showing (gasp) current voltages and the ability to set alarms/actions based on those voltages make the Gigabyte bios look like a toy for a developmentally challenged 2 year old.

Any manuf still using the cheesy plastic push pins with a wimpy springs to provide clamping force on the MCH on a board designed to be overclocked should be blasted out of the water as incompetent and I wonder if that contributed to the fairly poor max FSB obtained ( I quess the quad probally had more to do with it, but its still cheesy).

I was pleased to see the review. Overall good job. Thanks.
 
BillParrish said:
The richness of the bios settings, say compared to a Gigabyte, was covered well in the article but perhaps deserved a comment in the conclusion, its the richest in temp monitoring/alarms and fan settings is the best I have ever seen. The fan control, temp, and GTL level settings not to mention actually showing (gasp) current voltages and the ability to set alarms/actions based on those voltages make the Gigabyte bios look like a toy for a developmentally challenged 2 year old.
Click to expand...
Having used Asus, DFI, Gigabyte, MSI etc. there is no doubt in my mind that uGuru is the best hardware monitor/fan control solution offered by any of the main mobo manufacturers.
Combine that with the LED POST reporter & the profiling ability it's something that I genuinely miss when using a board without it.

and I wonder if that contributed to the fairly poor max FSB obtained ( I quess the quad probally had more to do with it, but its still cheesy).
Click to expand...
Unless [H] had a bad board (& tbh several of their previous review ocs of abits have fallen well below what was the norm in the user community so imo it's unlikely that they've all been bad boards) the IP35 Pro is known to be capable of considerably more than 450fsb.
I would have said that the 4x1Gb DIMMs may well be part of the problem for this review (it's harder for the memory controller to achieve the same results using more DIMMs) except that you say that the config was " an E6300 CPU, and 2GB of Corsair DDR3 XM2-10000 memory,".
Vist also doesn't seem as oc friendly as XP so maybe Vista 64 is even more so?


On another note, the IEE1394 header positioning doesn't appear to be a problem in practice as plenty of people say that they are usable with 8800 series, XT2900 etc..
 
arman01 said:
just wanted to point out that this motherboard is DDR2 based, and not DDR3 as is stated in the review about 20 times.

Also i must say that although it was a decent attempt at a review it did fall short of [H]'s usual review standards.

discuss...
Click to expand...

Sorry. Template issue with movign information around for publication. Wish we only had one product in front of us for a time. All corrections have been made. No there is not a DDR3 version of this board.

Please let me know specifically where we "fell short" so we can make attempts to correct this.

This is our first review using a fully new testing suite with Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit and a lot of new software.
 
It would be great to include a session of Temperature and Power Consumption of the board as compared to other boards.
 
Wow, just wow.

I stopped reading this review, after the first reference that the Board was DDR3. Glad to see you corrected it Kyle, but still, that was kinda a big slip for the [H]ard, and one I'm not used to seeing. ;)

I did end up reading it after you made the corrections.

Couple of suggestions for your reviews...

1. How about getting the reviews done in a more timely manner. After all, hasn't this board been out for quite some time? Hell, I got more information from all the threads about this board that have been published for months, than I did from your Review. I'm not sure if you're waiting for a free evaluation unit before you publish a review, but this should have been published awhile ago. I do like the [H]ard reviews, I just wish you had more Motherboards that you put to the test (ASUS, Gigabyte, Abit, DFI, MSI, etc). Especially with the X38 Boards that are about to be released I would hope to see at least those 5 manufacturers products reviewed (on or within a day or two of the NDA being lifted by Intel).

2. Follow up articles (or updated posts). With new BIOS releases, most Motherboards can go from decent to spectacular. With different RAM, Powersupply, and BIOS updates, often Motherboards can Overclock higher with better stability. Often you read about this in the Forums, but it would be nice to see some followup from [H]ard.

3. Full testing of the Board. Please fill the RAM slots to make sure the Board works in this configuration. There have been many posts in the Forums about some of the Boards you say were better at Overclocking (ASUS and Gigabyte), in which they had stability issues when all the DIMM slots are used. Also, what about 2x2gig sticks for testing as well, as this seems to be where people are going (plus this allows 8gigs of RAM for testing with 64bit OS's).

Just some of my thoughts and suggestions.
 
While the review wasn't as in-depth as they usually are, in all fairness it can't be easy moving to a new testing format and it is better to err on the side of caution in this matter. So I'd like to compliment Morry, Kyle, and Dan for the new and better format in Vista64, quad core, and other tweaks. But it's not all love, I do have to chime in and second the comment Powerhouse2k made as to timeliness. I got my IP35 Pro in the middle of June, so have had it for three months now, which is ages in the life of an upper level board. Having said that, I do appreciate that you can't review what a board manufacturer doesn't send you, and I'll take a shot in the dark that it is abit who is tardy in this matter. Thanks for the diligent work in the review and I look forward to more of the improved format!

"Review them, Machine! Review them... ALL!"
 
More information about how you reached your max FSB, specifically voltages, would be nice. Also, popping off the board cooling to give a verdict on how well its been done might be something to consider. The cooling on these boards is VERY poorly installed.
 
The overclocking of the board was an afterthought. [H] always goes on and on and on about BIOS settings and then never tells us how they affect overclocking. The one part of the review that most of us here care about the most is overclocking and it's been the smallest part of the reviewing proces at [H] for a long time.

For example, I was reading a review on Anandtech about the EVGA 650i Ultra and not only did they use different processors to overclock with, they gave voltages of the CPU and motherboard chipsets needed to get to that point. They gave temperatures of the CPU and NB/SB for each different overclock. They added active cooling to the NB/SB to see what difference it would make. They told us the RAM timings they were using. They made a chart showing it all for easy viewing.

http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2964&p=4

Now look at the [H] review of the same motherboard...

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTMyNSw3LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

Yes, there are tons of graphs that show that the 650i performs within a couple % of all similar boards. Ok. Well, what about when it's overclocked? Hmmm, 1 whole paragraph listing his maximum OC, with absolutely no details given whatsoever.


So, getting back to the IP35 Pro. A board designed for serious overclocking! Can't wait to see all about how [H] overclocked it! Nope. One little paragraph and some microscopic CPU-Z shots. No quad core tested, just an E6300. Don't know how many sticks of RAM they used. Don't know if they changed multipliers. Don't know what voltages they used, what the temps were. Don't have an overclocking methodology to share with us.

So, while I'm keeping in mind that this is the first review using Vista 64 Ultimate, I'll also be keeping in mind that I didn't really learn anything I didn't already know beforehand, except maybe for network throughput and utilization. Wow. I suppose I learned that at stock settings it's equal to the competition. Shocking.

I guess the part that upsets me is that there's absolutely no heart and soul in the review process. It's like a robot doing the motherboard reveiws. Someone with no caring of electronics and putting a new piece of equipment to the test. It was almost an assembly line review, like those Dell commercials. It's like the one reviewing the boards either doesn't know or doesn't care about overclocking, had a deadline to meet, and just cranked it out as fast as possible. Actually, with all the DDR3 errors, wrong graphs, and the weird reference about it being slower than DDR2 boards (huh?) I'm guessing it was cranked out as fast as possible.
 
i just ordered a IP35-E,. the low end $114 version i dont need all the special crap, hope it works out well for my 4400 :)
 
MrGuvernment said:
i just ordered a IP35-E,. the low end $114 version i dont need all the special crap, hope it works out well for my 4400 :)
Click to expand...

One of the guys I work with bought that model. He doesn't know much about overclocking, but all he had to do was set the FSB to 400MHz, manually set the CPU voltage up a little, and he was running at 3.2GHz. No brainer. It's been a couple months now and he hasn't had any issues. He's got it in an Antec 900 he bought at the same time.
 
Astral Abyss said:
One of the guys I work with bought that model. He doesn't know much about overclocking, but all he had to do was set the FSB to 400MHz, manually set the CPU voltage up a little, and he was running at 3.2GHz. No brainer. It's been a couple months now and he hasn't had any issues. He's got it in an Antec 900 he bought at the same time.
Click to expand...

Yip similar story here, threw up the FSB to 333MHz and 3.0GHz was there, no voltage adjustment required. (originally failed Prime 95 after 2 hours but I had C1E and EIST enabled - DOH! Sorted that and now its stable)
 
Interesting. [H]'s DDR2 1225 topped out at 1080, and my DDR2 1066 on the same board has topped out at 1224 (haven't bothered tweaking enough to try get further). Fascinating...

(2x1Gb ballistix tracer, for the record)
 
Audio playback of the selected album was enjoyable, with no distortion detected at all during the experience.
Click to expand...
Interesting. Many of the tracks on Zeitgeist are clipped quite badly, with some tracks having easily noticeable pops and clicks. Probably not the ideal album to use for audio testing.

No mention of double-booting or voltage droop? No mention of any other issues encountered -- were any other issues encountered?

I'll agree with the others on some points. I'd prefer to see less emphasis on performance (as we're all aware that P35 boards will perform similarly) and more emphasis on overclocking and BIOS features. Using 4 RAM modules, or different brands of RAM, would also be helpful.
 
I'd be really curious how many people out there care to see in a review:

1. Dozens of BIOS screenshots (none of which have any information on Overclocking in the review).

2. Information regarding Sound and Network (unless there was some problem during the review).

3. Benchmarks at Default settings compared to similar chipset Motherboards.

Isn't this the [H]ardOCP (I know what it originally stood for btw), that offered its readers high performance PC reviews. I kinda get tired of having to go to Anands for a more comprehensive review on Motherboards. Heck, when you do such a great job with your video card reviews, it's kinda sad to read a review like this one. Perhaps if you were under a deadline (like this was an X38 review), then I could understand the haste in getting it out with errors and none complete testing, but this Motherboard has been out for months now.

P.S. Oh, and why on page 3 do you say you are using a E6300 Core2 Duo CPU, while on the rest of the review you are using Core2 Extreme QX6850? Why have a different CPU, (and memory and FSB), for some testing but not all the testing?
 
Agree w/ almost everything here. What I'm most curious about are how it compares w/ other boards in situations that matter. Such as physical layout, features, issues, and OC.

Also, please drop, skip, or briefly go into performance that will remain the same across chipsets and ram type. This means sandra, games, etc. Unless there's a difference of more than 5%, I could care less.

1. The push pins have got to go. I got lucky and have a perfectly straight mount out of the box, but others have not been so fortunate. Having to go to the hardware store and pick up some screws shouldn't be necessary. :(

2. 1394 placement's poor...why not on the I/O backplate? How bout 2 more USB back there too? Now the side SATA ports allow a much cleaner install provided the case is large enough.

3. When pulling to/from a fast raid array on a good gige switch, does the Realtek pci based nic's performance really matter compared to some of the Marvell or Intel pcie based nics? Are we talking about 70MB/Sec vs 100MB/Sec?

4. There should be some variety w/ at least 2 each of cpu, ram, and heatsinks. What happens to the board when going from a duo to a quad? 4GB of RAM? How's the vdrop, vdroop?

5. Detailed info on the OC like...

-Room temp
-TIM and application method
-HSF used
-cpu-z, core temp, orthos...standard crap that we all run

Here's a sample screenie of voltage settings and other interesting info about the setup.

settings.jpg


Something like this goes a LONG way for comparison purposes. Remember the C2D OC Database?!

The review should focus on why one would or would not purchase this board. I've been pleasantly surprised w/ how easy it's been to achieve 24/7 500FSB stability on my lowly E6400 under nothing but quiet air. And even tho it crackles w/ an X-Fi (XRAM variant) unless the pci lat tool's set to 128 for it...hell...I've got my rock solid stable Abit back!! It's been a long time...Abit NF7 anyone? :D:D:D
 
Are the heatpipes wicked? And can the BIOS be flashed within Windows?

P.S. Didn't read the article. :(
 
zombiebeat said:
Yip similar story here, threw up the FSB to 333MHz and 3.0GHz was there, no voltage adjustment required. (originally failed Prime 95 after 2 hours but I had C1E and EIST enabled - DOH! Sorted that and now its stable)
Click to expand...

sounds great if i can do that, i do want to push this board, and eventually get a 6600 for it, from all i read it is basically the same as the pro, just lacks the fancy bells and whistles
 
Yea the review wasn't very [H]ard at all
if this board, and [H] is all about overclocking,why the afterthought of a samll paragraph on the max OC?
like the above posts, at least go into BIOS settings, offer some guidance to those who bought or will buy on what worked, what didn't etc
 
i just setup my IP35-E today with a E2140. running for now @ 2.66ghz on stock volts. really flawless build, no issues at all. i upgraded from a 165 @ 2.8ghz and i notice a difference in performance from my old A64 setup. even @ 2.66ghz i gained 20fps more in CS:S stress test compared to my opty @ 2.8ghz. yes, i know CS:S is cpu dependent but its what i play the most. heard alot of good things about the IP35 series. glad i went Abit.

first intel rig since my old pentium 266 :cool:
 
Jodiuh said:
2. 1394 placement's poor...why not on the I/O backplate? How bout 2 more USB back there too?
Click to expand...
if you fit the provided PCI slot backplate you'll get 1394 at the back & your extra 2 USB ports there.

3. When pulling to/from a fast raid array on a good gige switch, does the Realtek pci based nic's performance really matter compared to some of the Marvell or Intel pcie based nics? Are we talking about 70MB/Sec vs 100MB/Sec?
Click to expand...
more like 700Mb/s versus 900Mb/s assuming of course that the RAID can provide that.
 
My thoughts:

When testing an enthusiast board, use a Quad and populate all dimms. If you get good clocking results with a Quad, then it's a given a dual core will do just fine.
 
I gotta agree with an earlier poster about the review time-frame for this board. It's been out a while and to just know get to a nice board like this is kind of disappointing.

Oh well, better late than never.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top