Slashdot Log In
ATI, NVIDIA Launch New Chipsets for Socket AM2
Posted by
Zonk
on Tue May 23, 2006 11:30 AM
from the it's-called-synergy-folks dept.
from the it's-called-synergy-folks dept.
theraindog writes "The web is swirling with reviews of AMD's new Socket AM2 processors, but they're not the only new chips launching today. ATI and NVIDIA have both introduced new core logic to accompany Socket AM2, and The Tech Report has a comprehensive comparison of the new chipsets. ATI's CrossFire Xpress 3200 and NVIDIA's new nForce 590 SLI are run through an exhaustive suite of application, peripheral, and power consumption tests with surprising results. The nForce 590 SLI definitely has the edge when it comes to the sheer number of integrated peripherals and extra features, but the CrossFire Xpress 3200's performance is competitive, and its leaner approach pays big power consumption dividends. It looks like ATI may finally have a credible alternative to NVIDIA's domination of the Athlon 64 chipset market."
Related Stories
[+]
Athlon Socket AM2 Review 185 comments
NerdMaster writes "Hardware Secrets has just posted an Athlon 64 X2 5000+ review, one of the first AMD CPUs to support the new socket AM2. It runs at 2.4 GHz, has two 512 KB L2 memory caches (one for each core) and supports DDR2 memories." However, many are still predicting an end to AMD's dominance in the market thanks to Intel's Conroe.
Offsite: Doom 3 Like You've Never Seen
[+]
NVIDIA's 680i SLI Chipset Ready for Primetime 69 comments
AnInkle writes, "The Tech Report conducts their usual exhaustive evaluation of NVIDIA's other big launch today, the nForce 680i SLI. The new chipset pairs an already proven south bridge chip with a new north bridge that has impressive overclocking potential and a redesigned (read: fast) memory controller. Combined with a motherboard design, production-quality BIOS and polished tweaking software that are all attractive and retail-ready, you end up with a 'complete reference platform that's perfect for picky enthusiasts and serious overclockers,' if you want to pay for it."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Take your pick (Score:3, Insightful)
Which one you spend your money on is up to you and the aesthetics you find more pleasing.
As for me, I'll stick with my Toyota Corolla and the 42mpg that it gets.
Re:Take your pick (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Take your pick (Score:3, Funny)
Is ATI concentrating on usual Barbie collectors with this colors or what?
Re:Take your pick (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Take your pick (Score:2)
Re:Take your pick (Score:2)
Re:Offtopic too. (Score:2)
TDI Engine (Score:2)
I used to regularly get between 39 and 44 MPG out of it, and I did a lot of mixed secondary/highway driving. I think if you really drove with economy in mind, it would be closer to 45-50.
The price of the fuel fluctuates here
AM2 vs. Conroe (Score:4, Interesting)
Not entirely on topic, but it is interesting.
Re:AM2 vs. Conroe (Score:5, Insightful)
Wow, way to direct the comment moderator. Let me try. THIS COMMENT IS INSIGHTFUL.
Parent
Re:AM2 vs. Conroe (Score:3, Funny)
Re:AM2 vs. Conroe (Score:2)
Re:AM2 vs. Conroe (Score:2)
Why didn't AMD produce chipsets before? (Score:2)
Re:Why didn't AMD produce chipsets before? (Score:2)
A little worried about networking (Score:4, Interesting)
It seems to me that you're really limited to just 1-2 additional cards, and not having an in-built ethernet controller really limits flexibility..
I'm also not 100% sure about having only 1 PATA connector, although this is probably a good thing these days..
The difference in power consumption just between different motherboards is quite amazing - I have never really paid much attention to the actual motherboard I use in the past, but I guess it is starting to get quite important to over-all system performance these days.
Re:A little worried about networking (Score:2)
Re:A little worried about networking (Score:5, Informative)
This is also how Intel connect their networking controllers AFAIK. Do all Intel motherboards 'limit flexibility' therefore?
ATI merely doesn't have an ethernet controller embedded into their southbridge, and I don't blame them if they can let the board makers choose a suitable stand-alone controller that will be better in the end than whatever ATI put in.
nVidia went the opposite way, and put two GigE controllers with lots of fancy stuff into their southbridge. Great for the 1% of people who need two Ethernet controllers, but I expect it is a side-effect of nVidia's server chipset line which probably shares the southbridge.
Parent
Re:A little worried about networking (Score:2)
Re:A little worried about networking (Score:2)
personaly i don't think it will hurt ATI one bit.. board designers are used to this kind of thing and it will make no diffrence.. except on low end boards expect to see Realtek chips and high end see Intel Pro's or some thing of the like..
personaly i do
Re:A little worried about networking (Score:2)
doing it != more $
where as screaming this is faster than that = $
and well they are all about the $$$ so yea.. i have stoped reading them mostly also.
Re:A little worried about networking (Score:2)
I'll agree with you there, but...
It seems to me that you're really limited to just 1-2 additional cards, and not having an in-built ethernet controller really limits flexibility
Except for graphics cards (which have typically had their own bus since the days of VL - And even though anything can theoretically use x16, nothing does except graphics) and network, what more do you really need?
TV tun
Re:A little worried about networking (Score:2)
Re:A little worried about networking (Score:2)
I only have one card in my computer, a little PCIe GeForce 6200TC running my two monito
PCI-X is not PCIe (Score:2)
True to historical form, PCI-Express group made a completely different, incompatible standard (electrically and physically) but still used the same name. If you want a video card, you w
Whoa - the chipset alone makes 20W difference? (Score:5, Interesting)
But I have to admit, it never even occurred to me that the chipset alone could account for (over) 20W difference between systems - And that only considers the difference between the two, not the absolute draw. I had previously focused on the CPU, then the GPU, then HDDs, in that order.
With the current trend in power consumption, it looks like my next system will focus on the GPU first, then Northbridge, then CPU, then HDDs! Holy reversals, Batman!
What next - Should I worry just how much power my fans and ever-growing number of parts with numerous LEDs draw? I never considered them as a significant draw, either...
Re:Whoa - the chipset alone makes 20W difference? (Score:2)
That 100W? (Score:2)
Nevermind :) (Score:2)
Re:Short answer is to avoid nvidia; wasteful desig (Score:2)
Re:Short answer is to avoid nvidia; wasteful desig (Score:2)
It's OK to be ignorant, but don't assume that everything always boils down to some mega corp not giving a ratts ass about anything. Our chips are not wasteful. They are as fast as they can be for the available technologies that we have.
Re:Whoa - the chipset alone makes 20W difference? (Score:5, Informative)
Just a little meta-comment first... If you log in to post, you can have Slashdot tell you when someone replies. But since you asked, I'll presume you plan to check back in the near future.
For measurement, I use a simple kill-a-watt meter. WONDERFUL little toy, and pretty cheap. Unless you have access to dozens of samples, though, you'll need to do your research up-front and the measurement just confirms your success. The below suggestions you should take as BROAD generalizations, you really need to look up each component of your system and pick ones that work together and give you what you need, all while minimizing power.
For your first critical decision (even if you put CPU as the #1 constraint), graphics. Do you just want desktop productivity with only the most basic 3d acceleration? Go for on-board Unichrome or (a bit older) Radeon Xpress (which tend to include the whole chipset, not just video). If you want some "real" 3d power for gaming, but don't rank that as the sole reason you own a PC, try to get one of the newer mobile GPUs. Personally, I went with a GeForce 6600, which draws low enough power to work in a passively-cooled config, but has enough horsepower to play previous-gen games at full res and highest quality (and most current games at the default quality). You might also consider driver support for it first - Many GPUs now offer a wide range of performance, dynamically selectable, so you can run in low performance (and thus low power) mode most of the time, then kick it up to play a game.
For the motherboard, if you don't need a ton of peripherals, uATX boards tend to consider power draw as a design constraint whereas most MBs seem to assume you'll just get a bigger power supply if necessary. And now we see that chipset makes a big difference as well - I'll apparently need to research this topic far more for my next build.
Which brings me to power supply... Most people don't think anything of it, and get the cheapest, biggest one they can find. I currently run all SeaSonic S-12s (well, one older SeaSonic, the model of which I forget but the same basic design as the S-12s). Nice quiet 12cm fan, and 85% efficient. They cost a little more, but keep your total power budget in mind - When I say I don't have a single system drawing over 100W at-the-wall, I mean it. I have one 380W in my file-server (spinning up four drives will most likely represent the biggest load your system sees), and the rest have 220W (the lowest SeaSonic makes), with not even a hint of instability. And don't neglect what a difference a few percent more efficient makes - On a high-end rig that draws 400W internally, going from 70 to 85% efficient will save a whopping 60W at-the-wall.
Currently, the biggest difference you can make comes from the CPU. Go with a P4, and you might as well abandon power consumption as a design constraint. On the opposite end of that spectrum, if you don't need a lot of horsepower, the Via Epia boards (of which you can now get a dual-CPU model, the DP-310) absolutely rock and have everything on-board - I run a passively cooled single-CPU Dual-NIC Epia as my internet gateway, with a CF drive, and the whole thing draws 26W (IIRC); yet, when necessary, I can use it as a low-end desktop machine fully capable of doing just about any common task short of gaming or video editing. For my "real" machines, I currently have Athlon64s (one RS400 chipset and one NForce4, the latter of which I now regret after reading the FP link). Though spec'd at a TDP of 65W, in practice they draw 30-35W under load, and 7-11W idle. A Pentium-M would give more bang-per-watt, but they cost a hell of a lot more. And as I mentioned, the next-gen Core Duos look very promising.
For memory, running one gig stick instead of two 512MB sticks (otherwise ide
Parent
Re:Whoa - the chipset alone makes 20W difference? (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Whoa - the chipset alone makes 20W difference? (Score:2)
Wow? I actually hadn't seen a comparison of those in terms of energy efficiency yet.
Having just looked it up, I see the 7600GS draws a mere 32W - Fully 20W (give or take a few between implementations) less than the 6600!
And it comes in dual-DVI versions. Aww man - Now I need a reason to justify the upgrade!
Re:Whoa - the chipset alone makes 20W difference? (Score:2)
As a low-power desktop platform, the current-gen Intel Co
Linux support (Score:2, Interesting)
One of the reasons we haven't been able to move to athlon64 is the lack of Linux support on the nforce5 chipsets. In particular, SATA NCQ has never worked and afaik, they required an NDA for the ATA developers to work on this. I've also heard the ethernet has some issues. So let's hope these chipsets open up a bit.
Intel's chipsets have excellent Linux support BTW from the open ahci SATA to the e1000 ethernet drivers.
Re:Linux support (Score:2)
Re:Linux support (Score:2)
techreport crashes mozilla (Score:2)
Re:techreport crashes mozilla (Score:2)
nVidia Forceware 90 Series (Score:3, Informative)
Re:nVidia Forceware 90 Series (Score:2)
Re:nVidia Forceware 90 Series (Score:2)
*Raises his hand* (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:*Raises his hand* (Score:2)
On the other hand, I may just get a 754 chipset sempron in a month, instead of waiting.
Re:*Raises his hand* (Score:2)
The people who weren't able to fix their issues were extremely vocal, of course, and public opinion swayed away from VIA. Which is too bad, I've been extremely pleased with my VIA-equipped boards.
If the ATi chipset drivers are anything like.... (Score:2)
I tried one ATI chipset... (Score:3, Insightful)
After my previous experience with the dismal ATI graphic drivers, particularly in OpenGL, they are on my shitlist for at least the next three or four years. The hardware may be good, but who can tell with drivers that suck that badly?
I'd suggest steering WAY clear of any ATI chipset.
Just put together an Nforce4 system (Score:2)
"NVIDIA's nForce4 chipset family was introduced more than a year and a half ago, so it's long overdue for a replacement".
Dam you Techreport!
Btw a Passively cooled 7600GS from Newegg for $99 AR is a dam fine "budget" GPU choice.
Re:Question (Score:2)