Menu
VIA KT333 in the test: EPoX 8K3A + against MSI KT3 Ultra ARU

VIA KT333 in the test: EPoX 8K3A + against MSI KT3 Ultra ARU

Table of contents
  1. 1 Introduction
  2. Addendum: Elitegroup K7S6A
  3. Are you spoiled for choice?
  4. 2 EPoX 8K3A +
    1. Scope of delivery & documentation
    2. Equipment/layout
    3. Bios/overclocking
  5. 3 MSI KT3 Ultra ARU
    1. Scope of delivery & documentation
    2. Equipment/Layout
    3. Bios/Overclocking
  6. 4 Test system
    1. SiSoft Sandra 2002 - Memory Test
    2. WinACE 2.11
    3. CineBench 2000
    4. 5 Quake3Arena
    5. Vulpine GLMark v1.1
    6. 6 3DMark 2000 v1.1
    7. CPUMark
    8. 3DMark 2001
  7. 7 Conclusion VIA KT333
  8. Rating EPoX 8K3A +
  9. Rating MSI KT3 Ultra (ARU)

Test system

Our XP1700 + in the team with the GeForce 2 Ultra from Inno3D and a whole hodgepodge of memory modules came into play as the test system.

  • Processor
    • AMD Athlon XP 1700+
  • Motherboard
    • Asus A7N266-C (Revision 1.03; Bios 1001.B)
    • EPoX 8KHA + (Revision 2.0; Bios 2.11.2001)
  • RAM
    • 2x 256MB PC2100 Apacer DDR RAM CL2
    • 2x 256MB PC2700 Crucial DDR RAM CL2.5
    • 2x 256MB PC2700 Corsair DDR RAM CL2
    • 1x 256MB PC3200 OCZ DDR RAM CL2.5
  • Graphics card
  • Peripherals
    • Western Digital Caviar AC310100B
    • Teac 532E
  • Other
    • Logitech Mouse Man Wheel Optical (USB)
    • Microsoft Natural Keyboard Pro (PS2)
  • Software
    • Windows 2000 Professional ServicePack 2
    • nVidia Detonator 23.11
    • Via 4in1 version4.37a
    • DirectX 8.1

SiSoft Sandra 2002 - Memory Test

For the first time came in our reviews the 2002 version of the SiSoft Sandra benchmarksuit is used, so that we unfortunately cannot show any comparison values ​​to older boards in this discipline. A re-test of individual boards was not possible for reasons of time.

SiSoft Sandra 2002
  • Int Buffered:
    • MSI KT3 Ultra DDR333 CL2.5 (AtP 6)
      2.066
    • EPoX 8K3A + DDR333 CL2.5
      2.066
    • MSI KT3 Ultra DDR333 CL2.5 (AtP 5)
      2.066
    • EPoX 8K3A + DDR333 CL2.0
      2.065
    • MSI KT3 Ultra DDR266 CL2.0
      2.060
    • EPoX 8K3A + DDR266 CL2.0
      2.056
  • Float Buffered:
    • EPoX 8K3A + DDR333 CL2.0
      1.956
    • MSI KT3 Ultra DDR333 CL2.5 (AtP 5)
      1.955
    • MSI KT3 Ultra DDR333 CL2.5 (AtP 6)
      1.942
    • EPoX 8K3A + DDR333 CL2. 5
      1.941
    • MSI KT3 Ultra DDR266 CL2.0
      1.939
    • EPoX 8K3A + DDR266 CL2.0
      1.937

If you first look at the results of the integer measurement, the differences are hardly noticeable. However, there seems to be a dichotomy in the operating modes with DDR266 and DDR333. Of course, the difference between CL2.0 and CL2.5 does not bring any advantage here, as theResponse time of the storage, but the pure streaming value is decisive. Since the memory performance is measured between CPU and memory, the results are also far removed from the theoretical maximum of the RAM (2700MB/s). The processor or its FSB of 133Mhz do not allow more than 2.1GB/s. Sandra clearly shows the current weak point in the architecture.

The flaoting point measurement does not reveal any major differences. However, three groups seem to be forming here. In first place are the EPoX with CL2.0 and the MSI KT3 with the fastest possible timings with a CAS latency of 2.5. The somewhat throttled DDR333 with Crucial RAM follow closely behind. The bottom line are the boards equipped with DDR266.

WinACE 2.11

WinACE 2.11
Unit: minutes , Seconds
    • EPoX 8K3A + DDR333 CL2.0
      8:33
    • MSI KT3 Ultra DDR333 CL2.5 (AtP 5)
      8:35
    • Asus A7N266-C DDR266 CL2.0 (Dual Channel)
      8:36
    • EPoX 8KHA + DDR266 CL2.0
      8:37
    • MSI KT3 Ultra DDR333 CL2.5 (AtP 6)
      8:39
    • MSI KT3 Ultra DDR266 CL2.0
      8:41
    • EPoX 8K3A + DDR333 CL2.5
      8:43
    • EPoX 8K3A + DDR266 CL2 .0
      8:49

In WinACE, the two boards had it for the first time with our KT 266A and nForce reference boards, the 8KHA + from EPoX and the A7N266-C from Asus. And as already announced in the section 'Spoiled for choice', we experienced a little surprise with the 2nd place on the MSI board. Despite the setting CL2.5 it isjust behind the 8K3A + with CL2.0. Far ahead of the competition running with CL2.5. This leads to the assumption that the MSI board runs with more aggressive timings than the 8K3A + and for this reason does not work with the CL2.0 setting. However, it should be noted for the statistics: The 8K3A + takes the lead in WinACE.

However, with slower timings and when operated with DDR266 RAM, both boards must clearly subordinate themselves to their predecessor, the KT266A.

CineBench 2000

CineBench 2000
  • Shading (Cinema4D):
    • EPoX 8KHA + DDR266 CL2.0
      16.03
    • Asus A7N266-C DDR266 CL2.0 (Dual Channel)
      15.98
    • EPoX 8K3A + DDR333 CL2.0
      15.73
    • EPoX 8K3A + DDR333 CL2.5
      15.46
    • EPoX 8K3A + DDR266 CL2.0
      15.41
    • MSI KT3 Ultra DDR333 CL2.5 (AtP 5)
      15.40
    • MSI KT3 Ultra DDR333 CL2.5 (AtP 6)
      15.30
  • MSI KT3 Ultra DDR266 CL2.0
    15.21
  • Shading (OpenGL):
    • Asus A7N266-C DDR266 CL2.0 (Dual Channel)
      27,68
    • EPoX 8K3A + DDR333 CL2.0
      27.55
    • EPoX 8KHA + DDR266 CL2. 0
      27.44
    • MSI KT3 Ultra DDR333 CL2.5 (AtP 5)
      27,38
    • MSI KT3 Ultra DDR333 CL2.5 (AtP 6)
      27,37
    • EPoX 8K3A + DDR333CL2.5
      27.30
    • EPoX 8K3A + DDR266 CL2.0
      27,23
    • MSI KT3 Ultra DDR266 CL2.0
      27,22
  • Raytracing:
    • Asus A7N266-C DDR266 CL2.0 (Dual Channel)
      20,62
    • EPoX 8KHA + DDR266 CL2.0
      20.56
    • EPoX 8K3A + DDR333 CL2.0
      20.56
    • EPoX 8K3A + DDR333 CL2.5
      20.53
    • EPoX 8K3A + DDR266 CL2.0
      20,48
    • MSI KT3 Ultra DDR333 CL2.5 (AtP 6)
      20,31
    • MSI KT3 Ultra DDR333 CL2.5 (AtP 5)
      20.31
    • MSI KT3 Ultra DDR266 CL2.0
      20.27
  • Benchmark number three and the first major setback for the two KT333 boards. The optimized KT266A seems to get along much better in Cinebench 2000 than the KT333. The EPoX 8K3A + manages to push itself in front of the 8KHA + in the shading (OpenGL) test, but in the other two disciplines it has to place itself behind the MSI KT3 Ultra behind KT266A and nForce, which seems to like Cinebench 2000.

    On the next page: Quake3Arena

    Comments