Subsystem Testing

The first thing we'll check is the audio. We downloaded and installed to test its CPU utilization.

Much like every other Realtek solution we've looked at, CPU utilization was very high throughout testing. The average utilization was about 9%, with 7% being the low point, but the more intensive tests spiked at 14%. Today's CPUs should be a fast enough to compensate for this, but let's put it to the test in a real-world environment and see how this effects UT 2003 performance.

UT 2003 Inferno Sound Tests

For our UT2003 tests, we ran dm-Inferno benchmarks at 640x480, minimum detail with sound on and off. This was repeated at 1024x768. The reasoning is at low detail and resolution, the work will fall on the CPU and motherboard subsystem. Higher resolution is more representative of actual game play for most users.

UT2003 Low Resolution

At low resolution, the framerates take quite a beating. We lose about 24fps with sound enabled, but before we jump all over the Realtek, let's take a look at a resolution more representative of today's gamers.

UT2003 High Resolution

With more work placed on the video card, the gap between sound on and off is not as large. It is still present, with a 5fps difference, but you probably won't notice this while dodging rockets.

In terms of sound quality, I found the Realtek to be merely acceptable. For basic MP3, and movie playback, I didn't notice much distortion at all. Adjusting to higher volumes did result in more static, but stopped once I got to the desired volume. Gameplay was fine, with no distortion, though I did find the bass to be a bit low. Line-In recording was terrible though. No matter how much tweaking was done through the software, there was this horrible buzz in the background. I did manage to decrease the "buzz", but ultimately it never went away.

Hard Drive Performance

We used HD Tach to gauge read performance with our Maxtor 80GB HDD. Although the drive uses a PATA interface, I did test the SATA with our ABIT PATA-to-SATA converter. Please note that a true SATA drive may have different results, but our goal was to setup a scenario as close to apples-to-apples as we could.

Network Performance

We used to test the networking speed, and Windows Task Manager for CPU usage. We copied a variety of install files, totalling 758 MB, varying in sizes of 300kb to as much as 60MB per file from the KX600S Pro machine, to our IC7-MAX3 box, which uses an Intel CSA Gigabit Ethernet controller. We also performed the same test with an ISO image, totalling 761MB.

Both systems were connected via a Cat-5E crossover cable, which should prevent any bottlenecks that would arise with our standard 10/100 Linksys router.

Small File Test

	CPU Utilization	Total Time (Min:Sec)
Upload	42%	00:19.4
Download	49%	00:27.3

Download speeds averaged about 26.26MB/sec, and upload speeds about 44.7MB/sec which isn't bad, but the CPU utilization was very high.

Large File Test

	CPU Utilization	Total Time (Min:Sec)
Upload	43%	00:17.6
Download	38%	00:23.1

We see some improved numbers here with the ISO. Download speeds averaged about 28.43MB/sec, and upload speeds about 46.1MB/sec which is virtually identical to the small file test numbers, but CPU utilization was much lower.

Final Words

Upon it's initial release, the KT600 was dubbed the nForce 2 killer. What we have seen today says otherwise, but the Albatron KX600S Pro still makes a strong showing. Application performance, with the exception of the SiSoft MMX tests, was very strong, performing on par with the nForce 2. Gaming was another story, as it fell quite a way behind nVidia's part in the low resolution tests.

The Realtek solution was not well implemented at all. It is a major CPU hog, and the recording quality isn't something I would dare use if sound editing is your thing. There is also no 3rd party RAID controller (the Southbridge does make up for it), and although it shaves some of the cost off the board, you won't have the same expansion options as you would with a high-end board. I'll touch back on this in a moment.

Overclocking was something we weren't too happy with. Although we did end up with a decent CPU overclock, it was because we had to scale back the DDR speed to PC2700. Considering that we were using some high quality ram, and the board is rated for DDR400, you can see why we were a little disappointed.

If it sounds like we're being a little hard on the KX600S Pro, that is because we're looking at it from an enthusiast's perspective. However, the board is targeted more at the mainstream user, and in that case there are several areas we did like.

For casual overclockers, there is some performance headroom, and the Watch Dog Timer is a fantastic feature for overclocks that have gone awry. The 3Com Gigabit Ethernet is forward thinking, as that is the next step for home Ethernet cabling. The Realtek solution, though we've panned it, is good enough for day to day use, and VIA's VT8237 Southbridge is a great chip that offers RAID support if you need it.

Pros: Gigabit Ethernet, Watch Dog Timer, decent performance, cheap.

Cons: Realtek chip not well suited for sound recording, and uses a lot of CPU cycles. Overclocking issues.

Bottom Line: We mentioned earlier that this is not a high-end board, and as a result, you won't be busting your wallet for this board. With a street price of about , this board is certainly worth a look if you're looking into building a budget box to complement your high-end rig.

If you have any comments, be sure to look us up in our forums.

HOME