| ASUS Rampage IV Formula X79 Motherboard |
| Reviews - Featured Reviews: Motherboards | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Written by Hank Tolman | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Thursday, 15 March 2012 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ASUS Rampage IV Formula Motherboard BF3 Edition Review
Manufacturer: ASUSTeK Computer Inc.
Model Number: Rampage IV Formula
Product Name: Intel X79 Express Motherboard
Price:$369.99 (Newegg) Battlefield 3 Edition - $420 Full Disclosure: The product sample used in this article has been provided by ASUS. Within the world of personal computing, there is a group of people referred to as enthusiasts. This generalization can be a little confusing, so let's explore it. An enthusiast is someone who uses their computer for much more than the average user. An enthusiast can usually be further categorized as one of two types of people; a gamer or a performance tuner. For enthusiasts, the middle-of-the road just doesn't cut it. They want the best that manufacturers can provide. It is with enthusiasts in mind that ASUS created the Republic of Gamers line of products. The ASUS Rampage IV Formula LGA 2011 motherboard is one of the latest releases in the Republic of Gamers line. Here at Benchmark Reviews, we've gotten our hands on an ASUS Rampage IV Fomula Battlefield 3 Edition motherboard and we are taking you piece by piece as we explore this enthusiast inspired piece of hardware.
The Republic of Gamers line was introduced back in 2006, when ASUS used it to begin emphasizing the most cutting-edge hardware for enthusiasts. ROG motherboards are available in both AMD and Intel varieties. The Maximus and Rampage series tout Intel chipsets and the Crosshair series is made for AMD processors. More specifically, the Rampage IV series of ROG motherboards houses the Intel X79 Chipset with the LGA 2011 socket for Intel Sandy Bridge Extreme processors. Within the Rampage IV series there are three flavors. The Rampage IV Gene represents the low of the high-end, followed up by the Rampage IV Formula and finally the Rampage IV Extreme. Both the Rampage IV Formula and Rampage IV Extreme motherboards also come in a Battlefield 3 edition, which bundles the motherboard with the full version of BF3 and some other BF3 gear. The three different versions of the Rampage IV line differ slightly from one another and each of them, of course, differs somewhat from other X79 offerings from ASUS and other manufacturers. Follow us inside as we explore these differences and show you just what the ASUS Rampage IV Formula Battlefield 3 Edition motherboard has to offer. You are probably already very familiar with the X79 chipset by now. If not, please check out our reviews of the ASUS Sabertooth X79 TUF Motherboard or the ASUS P9X79 Deluxe Motherboard for more information about the Intel Sandy Bridge Extreme Chipset. For this review, we are going to focus on the differences between the ASUS Rampage IV Formula and other X79 motherboards. Closer Look: ASUS Rampage IV Formula MotherboardThe ASUS Rampage IV Formula Battlefield 3 Edition motherboard comes packaged in a box that is decked out in Battlefield 3 images and logos. The box also sports the requisite Intel logos and an SLI logo. All in all, it looks pretty cool.
Opening the flap on the front of the box reveals a windowed view of the motherboard. On the backside of the flap is a description of some of the more prominent features that the ASUS Rampage IV Formula comes with. You can read a short description of the SupremeFX III audio codec, the Extreme Engine Digi+ II, and the bundled software. It also mentions the inclusion of the X-Socket, which is a nice feature that allows you to hang onto your old Sandy Bridge CPU cooler instead of buying a new one. 
The ASUS Rampage IV Formula comes with a pretty standard set of accessories. You get four SATA 6Gb/s cables, four SATA 3Gb/s cables, an SLI bridge, a 3-Way SLI bridge, and a ROG Connect USB table. There is also a ROG connect booklet, the I/O cover, some ROG cable labels, and your standard motherboard book and driver/utility disc.
In addition to those relatively normal accessories, the ASUS Rampage IV Formula Battlefield 3 Edition comes with some BF3 and ROG gear. As the front of the box says, the card at the top has a download code for the full version of Battlefield 3 from Origin. The motherboard also comes with a Republic of Gamers door-handle do not disturb sign, a ROG Sticker, and a BF3 Lanyard.
The ASUS Rampage IV Formula motherboard is a full ATX motherboard that sports a lot of the features you are used to seeing in other X79 motherboards. In true Republic of Gamers fashion, the Rampage IV Formula motherboard has a red and black theme. One of the first things I noticed was the conservative style of the heatsinks when compared to some of the ASUS motherboards of the past. The style of heatsinks and piping on the Rampage IV Formula looks very rugged and robust, ready to meet the demands of gamers everywhere.
The Rampage IV Formula has a lot to offer on the I/O end. You get a single legacy PS/2 port, 6 USB 2.0 ports, 4 USB 3.0 ports, 2 eSATA ports, a Gigabit LAN port, 8-Channel Audio ports with an optical S/PDIF out port, a clear CMOS button, and the ROG Connect On/Off switch. Comparatively, I'd have to say that the Rampage IV Formula falls somewhere in the middle. You get 4 USB 3.0 ports, which require the addition of an ASMedia controller since Intel doesn't include any on the chipset. That's two more than the Intel X79 motherboard, but two less than the P9X79 Deluxe. Two powered eSATA ports, also provided by an ASMedia controller, are more than the Sabertooth X79 (which has one powered and one not) and definitely more than the Intel motherboard. The Gigabit Ethernet is provided by the Intel 82579V chip, which has recently been proven superior to other provider's alternatives in a gaming environment. So the I/O sits somewhere in the middle.
One of things that disappoints me on the Rampage IV Formula is the memory capacity. The less expensive Sabertooth X79 and Intel DX79SI both hold eight memory modules, as does the very similarly priced P9X79 Deluxe and the more expensive Rampage IV Extreme. The Rampage IV Formula does support quad-channel memory, with each DIMM slot representing a different channel; A1 is closest to the rear I/O panel and D1 is closest to the 24-Pin power connector. This still allows for up to 32GB of RAM and the speeds supported are the same as the other ASUS X79 motherboards at up to 2400MHz overclocked. The recommended configuration is for a single DIMM in D1, two DIMMs in D1 and B1, three in D1, C1, and B1, and the A1 slot only being used with all four DIMMs in place.
The Rampage IV Formula makes up for a lot, however, when it comes to the PCIe ports. One of the major selling points of the X79 chipset is that it has enough PCIe lanes to support four GPUs in a CrossFire or SLI configuration. Even so, the DX79SI and Sabertooth X79 only have room for three. The P9X79 Deluxe has four slots, but they are so close together that you can really only use three at a time. The Rampage IV Formula has PCIe GPU slots and they are spread out so you can use them all. Of course, if you are going to use them all, you'll have to buy the bridge separately. The configurations look like this:
Let's talk about those PCIe lanes for a minute. The lanes here are PCIe 3.0 lanes. While the technology for PCIe 3.0 lanes has been available for over a year, it hasn't been used until now. The main reason for this is that even PCIe 2.0 bandwidth, at 5GT/s is underutilized by current GPUs. PCIe 3.0 takes that bandwidth up to 8GT/s, but really adds much more because it uses a new technique that does away with the traditional 8b/10b encoding. That 8b/10b encoding can cost up to 20% in bandwidth, meaning the PCIe 2.0 lanes really give about 4GT/s. The new technique, called scrambling, only loses about 1 to 1.5% in bandwidth, so PCIe 3.0 very nearly doubles the previous standard. With that in mind, even running at x8, the bandwidth could, hypothetically, allow the GPU to run at the same bandwidth as traditional x16 slots. This hasn't panned out in testing, but it might prove useful when more GPUs start taking advantage of the higher capabilities.
To finish off our closer look at the ASUS Rampage IV Formula motherboard, we have the SATA ports. There are eight on Rampage IV Formula, besides the two powered eSATA ports on the rear I/O. As you are likely aware, the X79 chipset, like the other Sandy Bridge chipsets, only supports 2 SATA 6 Gb/s ports natively. Here there are four, two powered by an ASMedia controller. The red ports are SATA 6 Gb/s and the black are SATA 3GB/s ports. Rampage IV Formula Detailed FeaturesNow that we've had an overview of what the Rampage IV Formula has to offer compared to other X79 alternatives, let's look deeper into the more detailed features of this ROG motherboard. To start off, the ASUS Rampage IV series moves one step ahead of even the other ASUS X79 motherboards by implementing their Extreme Engine DIGI+ II. DIGI+ II digitalizes the control of the voltages on the motherboard. DIGI+ II adds even more features than its predecessor, allowing for even better voltage regulation for extreme overclocking. The DIGI+ II on the Rampage IV Formula includes an 8-phase CPU power design, a little lower than the 16-phase on the P9X79 Deluxe, and the same 2 +2-phase design for DRAM power. It also provides a 3-phase VCCSA power design. The ability to tweak the VCCSA through the Extreme Engine DIGI+ II is very nice, considering a major part of overclocking the X79 chipset is through boosting the bclk. The Rampage IV Formula lacks the TPU we have become accustomed to on newer ASUS motherboards, but the purpose of the Rampage IV Formula , overclocking and extreme gaming, really precludes the necessity anyway. It does keep the EPU, however, for enhanced energy efficiency. In addition to DIGI+ II, the ASUS Rampage IV Formula protects overclockers from frying their machine through the use of COP EX component overheat protection, an LED called a Voltiminder that lets you know when things are a little off, and ASUS C.P.R., or CPU Parameter Recall.
In the image above you can see the two DIGI+ chips found on the Rampage IV Formula, as well as one of the two ASMedia controllers (one for USB 3.0 ports and the other for the extra four SATA 6Gb/s ports). The Nuvoton chip is an I/O chip made for monitoring voltages, fan speeds, and temperatures. This chip allows you to use software such as the AI Suite II to monitor your components in Windows. The ICS chip is the internal clock generator and the SupremeFX III is actually just a cover for the audio CODEC, which we will explore more in just a bit.
Speaking of hardware monitoring, the ASUS Rampage IV Formula has the fancy LEDs up by the CPU fan connector that correspond with a whole list of diagnostics you can find the user's manual. Not too far from those LEDs are a bunch of tiny probe points. You can connect a probe to these points to see the exact voltage levels as they are coursing through your motherboard. The above picture is actually of the Rampage IV Gene; the one I took of the Formula from that viewpoint didn't come out. On the Rampage IV Formula, these probes are right beside the onboard power and reset buttons. That set of switches next to the power and reset buttons? That's the switch for the PCIe lanes, in case you want to switch things up a little. There's another little switch up there too. It's small and black, and is the LN2 switch for the extreme overclockers out there who use liquid nitrogen as their cooling preference.
Now back to the SupremeFX III Audio CODEC. ASUS has forgone the usual Realtek 7.1 channel audio CODEC for a full 8-Channel Audio CODEC with a 1500 uF Audio Power Capacitor. The SupremeFX III carries support for X-Fi Xtreme Fidelity, EAX Advanced HD 5.0, THX TruStudio Pro, Creative Alchemy, and Blu-ray audio layer content protect. Probably my favorite feature of the SupremeFX III, however, is the new shielding technology. One of the biggest problems with audio CODECs is the interference from other components. As you can see in the image, ASUS has completely isolated the audio CODEC on the Rampage IV Formula. This should help to diminish, if not eliminate entirely, the interference with other components. 
To finish off, let's take a look at the ROG specific features of the Rampage IV Formula because these are what really set this motherboard apart from other X79 motherboards. To start, the Rampage IV Formula has ROG Connect. When you start it up by pushing the button on the I/O panel, the white USB port turns into the ROG Connect USB port. By connecting a laptop, you can monitor POST code and status readouts and make adjustments to your overclock in real-time. Another ROG feature is GameFirst. This program allows you to manage your internet bandwidth usage and prioritize it to meet your gaming needs. If you are gaming online, downloading files, streaming musing, chatting, and doing anything else at the same time and your internet speeds begin to slow, GameFirst will divert the flow from these less important functions to make sure your ping stays low. Pwn on! The final ROG feature I want to talk about is the X-Socket. The X79 ROG motherboards come with some additional hardware that will allow you to keep your X58 CPU cooler and drive on with your Extreme Edition CPU Usage. Since the prime suspects for Sandy Bridge Extreme usage are probably X58 Extreme Edition owners, this is a pretty good deal.
Finally, the Rampage IV Formula comes with some nice, bundled software. First up is an Anti-Virus, Kapersky specifically. With Microsoft Security Essentials out now, this isn't too much of a necessity anymore, but it's a nice feature. ROG CPU-Z is included too. CPU-Z is free, but this one looks like ROG. Way cooler. DAEMON Tools Pro Standard is also included, for "backing-up" CDs, DVDs, and Blu-rays. It will also let you write your discs to your hard drive and run them off the optical drive emulator. Mem TweakIt and GPU TweakIt are also included, allowing you real-time manageability for your Memory and GPU similar to what you have for your CPU. Motherboard Features and SpecificationsASUS Rampage IV Formula SpecificationsSpecifications supplied by ASUS.
Motherboard Testing MethodologyMotherboards based on the same chipset, even from different vendors, will tend to perform similarly when equipped with the same hardware (processor, memory, video card, et cetera), so vendors strive to distinguish themselves on features. And as you might expect from ASUS, this motherboard is jammed with proprietary goodies: Extreme Engine DIGI+ II, EPU, auto-overclocking, fully digital power circuitry, various diagnostic LEDs, and a complete suite of software and utilities to let you make the most of it. You can even overclock the CPU and tweak the power settings from within Windows, without rebooting, with the included Turbo V Evo utility. Unfortunately, I didn't have four identical graphics cards to really give the system a workout; so you'll have to be satisfied with our standard test suite. I'll compare the ASUS Rampage IV Formula motherboard against a motherboard from each of the other recent chipsets, as well as another board from the Rampage IV line, the Gene. Intel X58 Express Test Platform
Intel P67 Express Test Platform
AMD 990FX Test Platform
Intel X79 Express Test Platforms
Benchmark Applications
AIDA64 Extreme Edition TestsAIDA64 Extreme Edition is the evolution of Lavalys' "Everest Ultimate Edition". Hungarian developer FinalWire acquired the rights to Everest in late November 2010, and renamed the product "AIDA64". The Everest product was discontinued and FinalWire is offering 1-year license keys to those with active Everest keys. AIDA64 is a full 64-bit benchmark and test suite utilizing MMX, 3DNow! and SSE instruction set extensions, and will scale up to 32 processor cores. An enhanced 64-bit System Stability Test module is also available to stress the whole system to its limits. For legacy processors all benchmarks and the System Stability Test are available in 32-bit versions as well. Additionally, AIDA64 adds new hardware to its database, including 300 solid-state drives. On top of the usual ATA auto-detect information the new SSD database enables AIDA64 to display flash memory type, controller model, physical dimensions, and data transfer performance data. AIDA64 v1.00 also implements SSD-specific SMART disk health information for Indilinx, Intel, JMicron, Samsung, and SandForce controllers. All of the benchmarks used in this test- Queen, Photoworxx, ZLib, hash, and AES- rely on basic x86 instructions, and consume very little system memory while also being aware of Hyper-Threading, multi-processors, and multi-core processors. Of all the tests in this review, AIDA64 is the one that best isolates the processor's performance from the rest of the system. While this is useful in that it more directly compares processor performance, readers should remember that virtually no "real world" programs will mirror these results. 
The Queen and Photoworxx tests are synthetic benchmarks that iterate the function many times and over-exaggerate what the real-world performance would be like. The Queen benchmark focuses on the branch prediction capabilities and misprediction penalties of the CPU. It does this by finding possible solutions to the classic queen problem on a chessboard. At the same clock speed theoretically the processor with the shorter pipeline and smaller misprediction penalties will attain higher benchmark scores. Like the Queen benchmark, the Photoworxx tests for penalties against pipeline architecture. The synthetic Photoworxx benchmark stresses the integer arithmetic and multiplication execution units of the CPU and also the memory subsystem. Due to the fact that this test performs high memory read/write traffic, it cannot effectively scale in situations where more than two processing threads are used, so quad-core processors with Hyper-Threading have no real advantage. The AIDIA64 Photoworxx benchmark performs the following tasks on a very large RGB image:
Intel's Clarksdale and subsequent CPUs have dominated the AES test due to their Advanced Encryption Standard New Instructions (AES-NI), which dramatically accelerate AES code. Again, we see similar results turned in by all the ASUS boards. 
Let's move on to the PCMark Vantage benchmark. PCMark Vantage TestsPCMark Vantage is an objective hardware performance benchmark tool for PCs running 32- and 64-bit versions of Microsoft Windows Vista or Windows 7. It's well suited for benchmarking any type of Microsoft Windows Vista/7 PC: from multimedia home entertainment systems and laptops, to dedicated workstations and high-end gaming rigs. Benchmark Reviews has decided to use a few select tests from the suite to simulate real-world processor usage in this article. Our tests were conducted on 64-bit Windows 7, with results displayed in the chart below. TV and Movies Suite
Gaming Suite*
Music Suite
* EDITOR'S NOTE: Hopefully our readers will carefully consider how relevant PCMark Vantage is as a "real-world" benchmark, since many of the tests rely on unrelated hardware components. For example, per the FutureMark PCMark Vantage White Paper document, Gaming test #2 weighs the storage device for 100% of the test score. In fact, according to PCMark Vantage the video card only impacts 23% of the total gaming score, but the CPU represents 37% of the final score. As our tests in this article (and many others) have already proven, gaming performance has a lot more to do with the GPU than the CPU, and especially more than the hard drive or SSD (which is worth 38% of the final gaming performance score). 
The TV and Movies suite concentrates on video playback and transcoding, but only uses two threads at a maximum, so most of the cores in these high-end processors are sitting idle. The Gaming benchmark relies on the hard disk and video card for over 50% of its score (see the Editor's Note above), and we're using the same video card for all platforms, so the results for all these motherboards are directly comparable. CINEBENCH R11.5 BenchmarksMaxon CINEBENCH is a real-world test suite that assesses the computer's performance capabilities. CINEBENCH is based on Maxon's award-winning animation software, Cinema 4D, which is used extensively by studios and production houses worldwide for 3D content creation. Maxon software has been used in blockbuster movies such as Spider-Man, Star Wars, The Chronicles of Narnia, and many more. CINEBENCH Release 11.5 includes the ability to more accurately test the industry's latest hardware, including systems with up to 64 processor threads, and the testing environment better reflects the expectations of today's production demands. A more streamlined interface makes testing systems and reading results incredibly straightforward. The CINEBENCH R11.5 test scenario comprises three tests: an OpenGL-based test that models a simple car chase, and single-core and multi-core versions of a CPU-bound computation using all of a system's processing power to render a photo-realistic 3D scene, "No Keyframes", the viral animation by AixSponza. This scene makes use of various algorithms to stress all available processor cores, and all rendering is performed by the CPU: the graphics card is not involved except as a display device. The multi-core version of the rendering benchmark uses as many cores as the processor has, including the "virtual cores" in processors that support Hyper-Threading. The resulting "CineMark" is a dimensionless number only useful for comparisons with results generated from the same version of CINEBENCH.
Let's take a look at some CPU-limited gaming results in the next section. CPU-Dependent 3D GamingStreet Fighter IV uses a new, built-from-scratch graphics engine that enables CAPCOM to tune the visuals and performance to fit the needs of the game, as well as run well on lower-end hardware. Although the engine is based on DX9 capabilities, it does add soft shadows, High Dynamic Range lighting, depth of field effects, and motion blur to enhance the game experience. The game is multi-threaded, with rendering, audio, and file I/O all running in different threads. The development team has also worked to maintain a relatively constant CPU load in all parts of the game so that on-screen performance does not change dramatically in different game scenarios.
I ran the Street Fighter IV benchmark at its lowest resolution (640x480) will all graphical features turned down to the minimum possible settings. This makes the video card much less of a factor in the results, biasing towards processor performance. PassMark PerformanceTest 7.0The PassMark PerformanceTest allows you to objectively benchmark a PC using a variety of different speed tests and compare the results to other computers. PassMark comprises a complete suite of tests for your computer, including CPU tests, 2D and 3D graphics tests, disk tests, memory tests, and even tests to determine the speed of your system's optical drive. PassMark tests support Hyper-Threading and systems with multiple CPUs, and allow you to save benchmark results to disk (or to export them to HTML, text, GIF, and BMP formats). Knowledgeable users can use the Advanced Testing section to alter the parameters for the disk, network, graphics, multitasking, and memory tests, and created individual, customized testing suites. But for this review I used only the built-in CPU tests, which aren't configurable. The CPU tests comprise a number of different metrics. The first three I'll look at are integer performance, floating point performance, and a benchmark that finds prime numbers.
Now we'll take a look at SSE and Encrypt performance.
SSE stands for "Streaming SIMD Extensions", and describes instructions that handle multiple chunks of data per instruction (SIMD = Single Instruction Multiple Data). SSE instructions work on single-precision floating point data and are typically used in graphical computations. SSE was Intel's response to AMD's "3D Now", which itself was a response to Intel's MMX instructions.
Let's move onto some more real-world applications. Handbrake Media EncodingIt's a truism that consumer-level computer performance reached the "fast enough" point years ago, where increases in system performance don't make thing any faster for most people. Web browsing, e-mail, word processing, and even most games won't benefit dramatically from a super-fast CPU. There are some exceptions, though, and media encoding is one of them: transcoding video, especially high-definition video, can bring the strongest system to its knees. Fortunately, media transcoding is one of those things that (depending on the design of the code, of course) that scales really well with both clock speed and the number of cores, so the more you have of both, the better your results will be. The free and open-source Handbrake 0.95 video transcoder is an example of a program that makes full use of the computational resources available. For this test I used Handbrake 0.95 to transcode a standard-definition episode of Family Guy to the "iPhone & iPod Touch" presets, and recorded the total time (in seconds) it took to transcode the video.
x264 HD Benchmark 3.19Tech ARP's x264 HD Benchmark comprises the Avisynth video scripting engine, an x264 encoder, a sample 720P video file, and a script file that actually runs the benchmark. The script invokes four two-pass encoding runs and reports the average frames per second encoded as a result. The script file is a simple batch file, so you could edit the encoding parameters if you were interested, although your results wouldn't then be comparable to others.
And now for the last 2 runs. 
SPECviewperf 11 testsThe Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation is "...a non-profit corporation formed to establish, maintain and endorse a standardized set of relevant benchmarks that can be applied to the newest generation of high-performance computers." Their free SPECviewperf benchmark incorporates code and tests contributed by several other companies and is designed to stress computers in a reproducible way. SPECviewperf 11 was released in June 2010 and incorporates an expanded range of capabilities and tests. Note that results from previous versions of SPECviewperf cannot be compared with results from the latest version, as even benchmarks with the same name have been updated with new code and models. SPECviewperf comprises test code from several vendors of professional graphics modeling, rendering, and visualization software. Most of the tests emphasize the CPU over the graphics card, and have between 5 and 13 sub-sections. For this review I ran the Lightwave, Maya, and Seimens Teamcenter Visualization tests. Results are reported as abstract scores, with higher being better. LightwaveThe lightwave-01 viewset was created from traces of the graphics workloads generated by the SPECapc for Lightwave 9.6 benchmark. The models for this viewset range in size from 2.5 to 6 million vertices, with heavy use of vertex buffer objects (VBOs) mixed with immediate mode. GLSL shaders are used throughout the tests. Applications represented by the viewset include 3D character animation, architectural review, and industrial design. MayaThe maya-03 viewset was created from traces of the graphics workload generated by the SPECapc for Maya 2009 benchmark. The models used in the tests range in size from 6 to 66 million vertices, and are tested with and without vertex and fragment shaders. State changes such as those executed by the application- including matrix, material, light and line-stipple changes- are included throughout the rendering of the models. All state changes are derived from a trace of the running application. Siemens Teamcenter Visualization MockupThe tcvis-02 viewset is based on traces of the Siemens Teamcenter Visualization Mockup application (also known as VisMockup) used for visual simulation. Models range from 10 to 22 million vertices and incorporate vertex arrays and fixed-function lighting. State changes such as those executed by the application- including matrix, material, light and line-stipple changes- are included throughout the rendering of the model. All state changes are derived from a trace of the running application.
SPECapc LightwaveSPECapc (Application Performance Characterization) tests are fundamentally different from the SPECviewperf tests. While SPECviewperf tests incorporate code from the various test programs directly into the benchmark, the SPECapc tests are separate scripts and datasets that are run against a stand-alone installation of the program being benchmarked. SPECapc group members sponsor applications and work with end-users, user groups, publications and ISVs to select and refine workloads, which consist of data sets and benchmark script files. Workloads are determined by end-users and ISVs, not SPECapc group members. These workloads will evolve over time in conjunction with end-users' needs and the increasing functionality of PCs and workstations. For this test, I ran the SPECapc "Lightwave" benchmark against a trial installation of Newtek's Lightwave 3D product. The benchmark, developed in cooperation with NewTek, provides realistic workloads that simulate a typical LightWave 3D workflow. It contains 11 datasets ranging from 64,000 to 1.75 million polygons and representing such applications as 3D character animation, architectural review, and industrial design. Scores for individual workloads are composited under three categories: interactive, render and multitask. The benchmark puts special emphasis on processes that benefit from multi-threaded computing, such as animation, OpenGL playback, deformations, and high-end rendering that includes ray tracing, radiosity, complex textures and volumetric lighting. The test reports three scores: Animation (multitasking), Animation (interactive), and Rendering. The numeric scores represent the time it took to complete each section of the benchmark, in seconds, so lower scores are better. I've found the SPECapc Lightwave 3D test to be an excellent indicator of overclock stability. In many cases, overclocked systems that will make it through every other benchmark here will crash in this test. It's also one of the most "fun" benchmarks to watch, as multiple windows with various complex rendering tasks appear and disappear on your screen. 
This is one of the most "real" benchmarks, since it's just a set of scripts that control a standard Lightwave installation (SPECviewperf uses embedded Lightwave code). BlenderBlender is an open-source, free content creation suite of 3D modeling, rendering, and animation capabilities. Originally released in 2002, it's available in versions for Mac OS X, Windows, Linux, and several Unix distributions. It supports rigid and soft-body objects and can handle the draping and animation of cloth, as well as the rendering and animation of smoke, water, and general particle handling. Our Blender test renders multiple frames of an animation of a rotating chunk of ice, with translucency and reflections. Rendering of this model uses ray-tracing algorithms and the program reports the rendering time for each of the animation's 25 frames. The results are a summation of the rendering times for all frames and the lower the score, the better. Bear in mind, though, that Blender can dispatch a maximum of eight threads, so the full power of the 980X and 3960X isn't being used here. 
POV-RayThe Persistence of Vision ray tracer is a free, open source 3D modeling program that uses ray-tracing algorithms to generate realistic three-dimensional images. Ray tracing is very computationally intensive, and the POV-Ray program has a handy built-in benchmark to let you check the performance of your system. Although AMD again brings up the rear, the FX-8150 really does pretty well, coming very close to the performance of the 2600K. But unlike Blender, POV-Ray can use as many threads as a CPU will give it, so the six core CPUs win again.
Rampage IV Formula OverclockingOverclocking is the key to success for the ASUS Rampage IV Formula when compared to other X79 motherboards. We've seen that other X79 motherboards have all faired equally well when overclocking. How will the Rampage IV Formula hold up? Considering its Republic of Gamers endorsement, it should do well. First up we have a ROG CPU-Z shot of the i7-3820 at clock speeds. Much cooler than the normal CPU-Z.
Next up is a CPU-Z screenshot of the locked i7-3820 CPU. Notice how the CPU doesn't have a K or an X at the end of its name. And yet, because of the ability of the X79 chipset to increase the bclk, we get a massive 1.150GHz boost in clock speed on this otherwise locked CPU. In reality, I didn't spend as much time as I would have liked tweaking the many different aspects available in the UEFI. I think I was actually limited by the RAM, surprisingly enough. In any event, I don't see the 5GHz barrier holding much of a chance against the i7-3820 with this motherboard after a little more work. Even so, while a 3.3GHz to 4.5GHz jump may not seem like much on the i7-3960X, you have to consider that it's an unlocked CPU and that it costs $1000. In my book, 3.6GHz to 4.75GHz on a locked CPU that costs a third of that is nothing short of outstanding. Let's take a look at the settings that took us there.
The only section of the UEFI we are really worried about here is the very first one. It's also the one that you open up to when heading in from the splash screen. First off, we're going to set the AI Overclock Tuner to Manual so we can start making changes. Next step is the BCLK Frequency. Since the i7-3820 is a locked processor, we are limited to only a 400MHz boost in the Turbo frequency without a bclk boost. We are going to set it to 125MHz. Anything higher is a little out of the question at this point. We want to overclock on all cores, so make sure the Turbo Ratio is set for it. For a stable overclock, 38 was the highest I could get for the modifier. The final change on this page is the CPU Clock Gen Filter. ASUS recommends you set it to 20UF to help maximize overclocking.
The Memory Frequency was causing me a little bit of trouble here, although it shouldn't have. The G.Skill memory I used should have been good up to 2400MHz, which is the limit of the motherboard as well, but if I set it to anything over 2000MHz, I couldn't get a stable overclock. I'm going to keep testing, and I'll make sure I post any findings. Anyway, make sure Xtreme Tweaking is enabled. I left the rest of the settings above the break here alone. Enable Extreme OV to make sure you can get enough voltage to the components. The BCLK Skew was set automatically when I changed the BCLK to 125MHz. I pushed up the CPU VCORE voltage to 1.6, the VTT CPU Voltage to 1.4, and the 2nd VTT CPU Voltage to 1.5.
Finishing up the settings, I pushed up the VCCSA to 1.45. Be careful here, as many overclockers will tell you not to mess with the VCCSA settings. However, with the Rampage IV Formula, the VCCSA runs on a 3-phase power design that can handle a lot more voltage. I pushed DRAM voltage up to 1.8 for all channels, CPU PLL voltage to 2.1, and PCH 1.1v voltage to 1.4v.
To sum it all up, I was very impressed with the overclock settings on the Rampage IV Formula. You can tell that this motherboard was created for overclocking. That much is apparent from the first four options in the Extreme Tweaker section, Normal OC, Gamer's OC, Extreme OC (low current), and Extreme OC (High Current). The board comes out of the box ready to overclock. Of course, if you don't want to mess with the UEFI, you can overclock through the AI Suite II software package included with the motherboard. ROG X79 Express Motherboard Final ThoughtsASUS' Republic of Gamers series was introduced to cater to enthusiasts. The X79 Chipset is an Intel production introduced to cater to enthusiasts. The two combined should be the ultimate in enthusiast PC capability. The Republic of Gamers Rampage IV series is made up of the Gene, the Formula, and the Extreme. So how does the Rampage IV Formula rate on the scale of X79 motherboards?
First, the bad. I was disappointed that the Rampage IV Formula didn't have eight DIMM slots. So what if 32GB of RAM is plenty. This is an X79 motherboard. Extreme is the word. Well, apparently Extreme IS the word, because you'll have to buy the Rampage IV Extreme to get eight DIMM slots. And that about sums up the bad. Unless, of course, you count my disappointment at the existence of a legacy PS/2 port. Although, I suppose if anyone is going to need a PS/2 port, it would be extreme gamers. Who else needs unlimited simultaneous keystrokes? Only newbs settle for six. With that behind us, let's take a look at the good things the Rampage IV Formula has to offer. First, of course, is the overclocking capability. The Rampage IV Formula offers the absolute best in terms of voltage control and precision tuning. I haven't seen this level of precision since the Crosshair IV Formula with the AMD 990FX chipset. Of course, things have improved even since then. The Extreme Engine DIGI+ II brings in enhanced VCCSA control to help in the blck tweaking. Enhanced controls also extend into the Tweaker's Paradise section for the CPU, GPU, and RAM. The ASUS Rampage IV Formula also address a couple of issues that overclockers have had for a while. For one, they fixed the variable voltage stepping on startup that causes cold boot issues. You can get the full voltage you need for your overclock right from the start. Also, the AI Suite II gives you excellent monitoring ability from within Windows. But those readings could vary a little too much, so the Rampage IV Formula offers probe points so you can use your own tools. Right down to Mem TweakIt, GPU TweakIt, ROG Connect capability, and GameFirst, the Rampage IV Formula impressed in its ability to deliver unparalleled gaming performance for any PC Enthusiast. Throw in the full version of Battlefield 3 and you're ready to go. Add four more DIMM slots and this would be my choice for the best X79 motherboard on the market for its price. Then again, it's only $70 more for the Rampage IV Extreme.ASUS Rampage IV Formula ConclusionIMPORTANT: Although the rating and final score mentioned in this conclusion are made to be as objective as possible, please be advised that every author perceives these factors differently at various points in time. While we each do our best to ensure that all aspects of the product are considered, there are often times unforeseen market conditions and manufacturer changes which occur after publication that could render our rating obsolete. Please do not base any purchase solely on our conclusion, as it represents our product rating specifically for the product tested which may differ from future versions. Benchmark Reviews begins our conclusion with a short summary for each of the areas that we rate. My first impression of the ASUS Rampage IV Formula was a disappointment due to the limited DIMM slots. That's about as far as my disappointment got, however. In creating the Republic of Gamers series, ASUS has listened to the needs of extreme gamers; prioritized bandwidth for gaming, extreme overclocking control and management, the best Ethernet hardware available, and isolated, high quality sound. With four, actually useable PCIe slots, the ASUS Rampage IV Formula offers everything and an enthusiast needs. The performance difference between the Rampage IV Formula and other X79 motherboards is really in the details. While stock performance will be very similar, the overclocking capabilities of the Rampage IV series are superior. GameFirst also helps keep lag down and ping low. These details set the Rampage IV Formula ahead of the competition. There really isn't a lot of flare to the appearance of the ASUS Rampage IV Formula. It holds true to the Republic of Gamers red and black color scheme. The heatsinks on the chipset and the VRM are stylized, but not terribly fancy. The subtle ROG logos are really the only relief features. It certainly isn't a bad looking motherboard, but I like the Rampage IV Extreme look a little better with the fan on the chipset heatsink. 
The ASUS Rampage IV Formula motherboard holds up to the highest traditions of ROG motherboard construction. The Extreme Engine DIGI+ II is built on Japanese 10K Black metallic capacitors. According to ASUS, these have a lifespan five times that of solid capacitors, the industry standard component, and they also have better efficiency and higher stability at high temperatures. That's just a taste of what this motherboard is made of. The construction leaves nothing to be desired and, like the Rampage III series for the X58 chipset, you are going to be upgrading long before your components die. I touched on the functionality a little earlier because it pertains a lot to the performance of the Rampage IV Formula. In reality, this is an overclockers motherboard, made for enthusiasts. The little extras provided by ASUS to keep their gamers happy are what makes this motherboard so functional in the most extreme environments. From the highest quality sound to the highest quality Ethernet connection, the Rampage IV Formula will keep you gaming on point. The Rampage IV Formula motherboard will run you around $369.99. That's up near the top end of the X79 motherboards, though it will cost you less than the Rampage IV Extreme. If you decide to get the Battlefield 3 edition that we reviewed here, that'll cost you about $50 more. It comes with the full version of the game and some BF3 gear. What really makes this motherboard hold its value is the overclockability. With enhanced tuning capabilities and manageability, the ease of boosting even the locked CPU we tested in this article is worthy of praise, and certainly worth the price. Pros:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comments
Because he's using the same video card in each board, if he had of also used the same RAM and CPU it would have been easy to see if there was any difference in BF3 caused by the main board. It would also have been interesting. At the very least, it could be reported that no difference was found in the game using different mobos.
However, I can excuse not doing it because it would have been a lot of extra work. Sure would have been interesting though.
What if it was tested and there was a difference? Wouldn't you like to know that? How would that not be classified as testing the motherboard if they all used the same gpu? (Again, I don't think there would be a significant difference between motherboards). Even knowing there was no difference would have been reassuring, if only a little. But it would have been a little extra work for something we're already 99% sure of.
-Hank
Who spends thousands of dollars on computer hardware and then chinces on the operating system over a few dollars?
Nice o/c by the way.
Thank you for your time,
Myles Thomas