Pentium 4 3.46 Extreme Edition and 925XE: 1066MHz FSB Support is Here
by Anand Lal Shimpi on October 31, 2004 3:00 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Intel D925XECV2: Basic Features
The Intel 925XE chipset is essentially the 925X chipset with the addition of a 1066 FSB option. You can find more information on the 925X chipset in the AnandTech 925x/915 launch article.
| Intel D925XECV2 Motherboard Specifications | |
| CPU Interface | Socket T (Intel LGA-775) |
| Power Interface | 24-pin (775 & Server) ATX and 4-pin 12V |
| Chipset | Intel 925XE/Intel ICH6R |
| Bus Speeds | -2% to +10% in 1% increments |
| PCI Express Speeds | 100 to 109.24 in 1.32MHz increments |
| PCI Speeds | Default (33.33MHz), 36.35, 40.0 |
| Core Voltage | No CPU Voltage Adjustments |
| DRAM Voltage | Default, 1.8V to 2.1V in 0.1V increments |
| PCI Express Voltage | No PCIe Voltage Adjustments |
| DRAM Speeds | 266,333,400,533,667 |
| Memory Slots | Four 240-pin DDR2 Dual-Channel Slots Memory to 4GB Total |
| Expansion Slots | 1 x16 PCI Express Slot 2 x1 PCI Express Slots 4 PCI Slots |
| Onboard SATA | 4-Drive SATA by ICH6R |
| Onboard PATA | One Standard PATA IDE 100/66/33 (2-drives) |
| SATA/IDE RAID | 4-Drive Intel Matrix RAID With Native Command Queuing |
| Onboard USB 2.0/IEEE-1394 | 8 USB 2.0 ports supported by ICH6R 3 1394A FireWire ports by ICH6R |
| Onboard LAN | 1 Gigabit PCIe Ethernet by Marvel 88E8050-NNC |
| Onboard Audio | Realtek ALC8800 High-Definition Audio Codec |
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
63 Comments
View All Comments
AlexWade - Sunday, October 31, 2004 - link
Now if only I can afford and find one ...MMORPGOD - Sunday, October 31, 2004 - link
IntelUser2000 - Sunday, October 31, 2004 - link
DDR2 is not a stupid move, its the speed they are at that's stupid. Remember DDR? They first ones ran at 200MHz, which were 50% faster than PC133 and still way faster than the enthusiast 166MHz SDRAMs. DDR's latency were higher, but since their clock is much higher, it wasn't a big problem as DDR2 vs DDR. However, PC1600 DDR still was not a big improvement over PC133, it was when PC2100 came that DDR started to shine.Another thing:
Quote:"With the original 925X chipset we were a bit unhappy to see that the Pentium 4's 800MHz FSB was paired with DDR2-533, creating one of those frustrating asynchronous situations."
I think 800MHz bus with DDR2-533 is actually VERY synchronous. First look it doesn't look like it. However since DDR2s latency is higher, it doesn't act like DDR533, it acts like DDR400. There was a Tomshardware review that was trying to predict the performance of 1066MHz bus.
First config was: 800MHz bus, DDR2-533
Second: 1066MHz bus, DDR2-533
Third: 1066MHz bus, DDR2-667
Guess which one had the biggest performance benefit? The third one, contrary to most people's belief. I think that tells that because of the DDR2's latency, you need DDR2-667 to perfectly match 1066MHz bus. Since Intel chose to stick with DDR2-533, they have created an asynchronous situation, making the performance not so much better. They should have went DDR2-667 with 1066MHz bus.
SLIM - Sunday, October 31, 2004 - link
One thing I didn't catch from anand's review is that the 3.46ee is rated at 110.7 watts according to [H]; just another reason to go AMD. Makes you wonder what the 3.73ee (which is supposed to launch this quarter) will have for a heatsink...Prometia for everyone:)
Tides - Sunday, October 31, 2004 - link
I remember reading a week or two ago about "AMD is going to have a tough time keeping up," from the lips of an Intel guy.Was this latest outing with the new P4EE's the proof? Perhaps I lack the foresight to understand what will happen in 6 months time, but in who's world is AMD going to have a hard time keeping up with? Cyrix's?
Tides - Sunday, October 31, 2004 - link
"ddr2 is a stupid move."Tides - Sunday, October 31, 2004 - link
not to mention, hi, ddr2 for is a stupid move. high latency, crap bandwidth, not just twice the price since you wouldn't have had to upgrade your ram otherwise if you already had solid ddr1.it reminds me of rambus. and beta max. and sony's discman. what else? ddr2 should have never come out imo. ddr3 is where it's at, hopefully amd will go straight to ddr3 and save it's customers and themselves the hastle of having to buy new ram, new mobos and so forth just to have to do it again with ddr3. i like faster everything as much as everyone else, but amd 64 proves ddr1 is alive and well, and ddr2 is what? exactly? perhaps in a year down the road, or two; it'll be worth something at the end of it's life cycle, just as ddr3 starts poking it's head about.
GhandiInstinct - Sunday, October 31, 2004 - link
Why don't they just screw any other core and focus on pumping out $1000 EEs? Everyones buying them, might as well. I really would like to know the stats for Intel's sales on their new cpus and chipsets, exact numbers.GhandiInstinct - Sunday, October 31, 2004 - link
#17 I was infering this world is off balance with that reality...Gnoad - Sunday, October 31, 2004 - link
wow. $1000 a pop for a CPU that gets destroyed by processors that cost a quarter as much. Totally asinine.