Subsystem Testing
The first thing we'll check is the audio. We downloaded and installed Audio Winbench to test its CPU utilization.
CPU utilization was fairly high throughout the DirectSound3D tests. CPU utilization never got beyond 17%, but it did average in the 6% - 10% range, which is a lot higher than the <2% averages we've seen with the nForce 2. It's not the end of the world, given that the slowest CPU you would ideally be using is a 2.4GHz "C", but we would have liked to have seen lower numbers this late into the Realtek chipsets lifecycle. This is a synthetic benchmark though, and since I know all of you enjoy a game or two, let's see how the sound will affect UT 2003 performance.
The [H]ardocp Tool has an option to enable and disable sound during testing. Tests will be done with the same hardware configuration as the rest of the benchmarks, except we'll only be displaying the Pentium 4 2.4GHz "C" numbers.
UT 2003, Minimum Detail, 640x480 Resolution
It's plain to see that the CPU takes a hit when enabling the onboard sound. Keep in mind though that the settings used are not going to be ideal if eye candy is important to you. Lets see what happens when we setup UT2003 to how a typical gamer would use it.
UT 2003, Maximum Detail, 1280x1024 Resolution
When it comes down to it, at high resolution and detail levels, the onboard sound's CPU utilization will not be a factor at all.
In terms of sound quality, I found gaming to be very enjoyable, I watched some snippets from “Kill Bill Vol 1” and listened to a little mix of music (Jazz to Pop to Alternative to Heavy Metal) and found the sound to be of good quality, it would have been nice to use the S/PDIF out, but there is none on the I/O plate, and they don't include a jack for their header (anybody know where I can find one?).
Network Performance
We used DU Meter to test the networking speed, and Windows Task Manager for CPU usage. We copied a variety of install files, varying in size of 300kb to as much as 150MB per file from the Foxconn machine, to my NF7 box. In between the two I tested with a crossover cable. Here are the results from both an upload and download (as seen from the Foxconn) of the same files.
As you can see, the Foxconn appears to be taking a slightly larger hit on the download side, although the throughput was higher on the upload. The CPU utilization reached as high as 16% on the close to 10MB/Sec download, and 14% on the 10.5MB/Sec upload. These numbers are not as bad as a stand alone NIC, but we have to wonder if there is a driver issue here that is getting us a little to close to that 20% mark. Especially seeing as this is at a 100Base-Tx connection, and the NIC has the ability to connect at 1000Base-Tx.
Final Words
Brook's Two Cents
Foxconn designed a nicely laid out motherboard, it has the ability to shine, maybe even in the enthusiast marketplace, but as yet, they have not even begun to crawl in that space. The inability to even change VCore from stock is a drastic limitation to everyone but the faint of heart that changes nothing. With some of the other options included in this package, Gigabit NIC, PAT and 4-SATA connectors (2 with RAID), as well as the Intel 875p chipset, one would have to wonder, what market are they aiming at with this product? My guess would be the server space, as this would be a good fit.
A few things that Foxconn could do to improve enthusiast appeal:
• Vcore adjustments in BIOS
• Greater Flexibility in the FSB range
• S/PDIF on the I/O plate or include the Header Jack
• Further testing of "Qualified" SDRAM Manufacturers
• Reposition the Audio CD and Aux inputs, as they are a long reach on even Mid-Tower cases.
• Add the ability to turn of the Silicon Image RAID Controller
Hubert's Two Cents
Based on what we've seen here today, it's obvious that Foxconn did a good job on their flagship entry into the Pentium 4 motherboard market. Performance was close to what we've come to expect out of P4 boards, and comes packed with plenty of onboard features.
However, with the inability to overclock past 233FSB at this time, this is probably not the board for the enthusiast. I feel the board is better suited for the corporate workstation environment or a home user who isn't concerned about playing around in the BIOS. On one hand, the lack of BIOS options limits the tweaks that can be done, but by the same token, it also limits the damage you can do to the PC (to an extent).
I've seen this board retail at , which definitely places it below the cost of some of the fancier Springdale and Canterwood boards. If Foxconn can release an updated BIOS that is more enthusiast friendly, they may have themselves a sleeper hit here.
Pros: Everything is included but Video Memory and CPU, Well-designed layout of components and connectors, Well-designed, easy to follow manual, Four SATA connectors, easier than most to configure SATA primary boot over PATA
Cons: NIC uses a little more CPU resources than most boards in this class (especially consider Gigabit), Inability to adjust VCore, Overclocking limitations 233FSB maximum (see above also), No S/PDIF on the I/O Plate (or included Jack for their header), Some minor tweaks / buffing, needed in the BIOS, Limited Qualified SDRAM manufacturers list
Bottom Line: The Foxconn 875A02 is a quality all around motherboard, with the exception of the inability to overclock. Hopefully Foxconn will introduce their Performance BIOS soon. If they do it right, the 875A02 could be a serious contender in the enthusiast's market place.
If you have any questions or comments, feel free to discuss it in our Forums.
HOME
