Name: Talon Date: July 29, 2006 at 19:48:17 Pacific Subject: which mobo for ATI ? OS: 1GB CPU/Ram: Athlon Model/Manufacturer: -
Comment:
hi im planning to buy an Ati video card like x800XL or X850XT for building another computer and have no idea which motherboard is best for ATI cards. Any suggestions?
P4 D - 2.66GHz 1024MB DDR2 RAM ASUS A8N-SLI Motherboard Gigabyte Nvidia Geforce 6800 Ultra 256MB PCI-E Creative SoundBlaster Audigy 2 ZS Platinum 2x Western Digital Raptor 74GB
Without knowing what processor you're going with, really hard to make any recommendation.
Also, I don't know why you're specifically getting an X800XL or X850XT. There are better cards available from ATI and NVidia at or close to those price ranges.
"How many squirrels had to die to make you look fly?!"
If crossfire isn't desired, then NForce4 Ultra or SLI based motherboards. If you want Crossfire, you obviously need an ATI based motherboard. ATI chipset boards regardless don't perform overall as well as NVidia chipset based motherboards, while they suffer from far more bugs and other issues.
In Nforce4 Ultra boards, I'd recommend the DFI NForce4 Ultra Infinity, or LANParty NF4 Ulra-D or DR if you want RAID. The LANParty overclocks better, but the Infinity costs less. Both very solid and reliable motherboards.
Again, those aren't good choices for the money in graphics cards.
LOL...looks like I'm disagreeing with you quite a bit.
You absolutely do not need an ATI chipset motherboard if you are running an ATI card unless you want Crossfire support. Otherwise, you're better off with an NVidia chipset based motherboard because they are still better performers, more stable, and less buggy.
I never said you NEEDED an Xpress chipset but it makes sense especially when the Xpress 200 chipset is faster than the nForce 4 in most cases (believe it or not, it's true so get over it). Stability is usually solid across the board for nforce 4 chipsets because of the onboard CPU memory controllers. Then you'll probably tell me to explain why DFI nForce 4's overclock so much better than others: BIOS diffences such as American Megatrends and Micro Firmware Incorperated.
"and less buggy." Yeah, it's quite clear you've never used an xpress 200 chipset. The nForce 4 is actually quite buggy such as when pairing it with a Manchester or earlier AMD core.
Since you're gaming, go with an Xpress 200 chipset. nForce 4 Ultra does have the Xpress 200 chipset beaten in some areas but not many and only in very few select gaming environments such as games that are more CPU hungry than GPU hungry like Unreal Tournament 2004. But thoses days of Direct X 8.1 when the CPU was so very important have come to and end...a LONG time ago. The xpress 200 uses more PCI express communication lines than the nForce 4 which is why it excels in pumping out more frames in GPU hungry games. But the nForce 4 has a single northbridge/southbridge interconnect that allows for better basic I/O device performance such as USB 2.0, firewire, and I/O drive (such as hard drives) performance unlike the Xpress 200 that has two lanes connecting the PCI express bus to the northbridge/southbridge inerconnect communication system.
Gaming with an ATi card? Go xpress 200.
Running a server/number crunching machine such as a 3D rendering workstation? Go nForce 4.
"I never said you NEEDED an Xpress chipset but it makes sense especially when the Xpress 200 chipset is faster than the nForce 4 in most cases (believe it or not, it's true so get over it)."
No, you left a vague statement without anything explanation or facts to back it up. I had no idea what you were saying other than vaguely asserting the X200 chipset's superiority in some way. Helps to explain things...
And there's no need to get your panties in a bunch... lol... "get over it"...
Performs better in most cases, huh? You need to back that up. Provide a link or something. Otherwise, it's just you saying it's so, and then telling me to get over something like personal insults make you right. Sorry, but facts and sound reasoning is actually what makes you right. Like this...
Generally speaking, NForce4 Ultra or SLI boards are regarded as being less problematic, suffer less compatibility issues, etc. That's to be expected this early in the game for ATI in the mobo chipset market.
ATI is getting there in terms of performance, reliability, etc. But it's pretty hard to argue against the NF4 Ultra or SLI in Socket 939 unless you're going for Crossfire.
"Yeah, it's quite clear you've never used an xpress 200 chipset. The nForce 4 is actually quite buggy such as when pairing it with a Manchester or earlier AMD core."
I've played with one. And yes, I found it more buggy.
He's not buying a Manchester or earlier AMD core, and I've not seen any issues personally with the Manchester.
here's your link. In general, the Xpress 200 has better gaming performance but lacks periferal performance.
"I've not seen any issues personally with the Manchester." O_O
There is a HUGE issue with the Manchester core and the nForce 4. If you run 4 sticks of DDR400 memory on an nForce 4 chipset, your memory will not get any faster than 333mhz using a T2 command rate. and it wasn't even nVidia who fixed that bug. It was AMD. The Venice core fixed that issue.
"That's to be expected this early in the game for ATI in the mobo chipset market."
nVidia hasn't been making chipsets that much longer than ATi. ATi's first chipset was inspired and meant to compete with the nForce 2, of course the successor to the nForce.
"I've played with one. And yes, I found it more buggy."
Try using a few more. It's a solid product and this is coming from someone who has not been too fond of ATi products since the Radeon Xxxx series released.
Dude, your link is virtually irrelevant. Your link first off didn't provide benchmarks with NF4 Ultra. It didn't even apply to the AMD platform since it only compared performance for the Intel platform chipsets!
Secondly, it got beat slightly by VIA's K8T800 chipset in gaming in your link!
So your link was almost completely irrelevant aside from showing 2 extra lanes on the PCI-e. That shows it possibly could be better, but without benchmarks proving it out, it doesn't mean diddly. If it did, by that logic Intel P4's at higher clock speed than Athlon 64's should smoke the Athlon 64 since they run at a far higher clock speed. They flat out don't.
Produce some actual benchmark comparisons.
"There is a HUGE issue with the Manchester core and the nForce 4."
The Manchester is a dual core CPU that came out *after* the Venice. Might want to get your cores straight. There is absolutely no issues with the Manchester and NForce4 chipsets.
I know what you're getting at though, and it's irrelevant to the computer he is building.
"nVidia hasn't been making chipsets that much longer than ATi."
And how was nVidia's first chipsets - the original nForce? Didn't perform quite as well as the VIA chipsets (which were the chipset of choice at the time), and more buggy. Very much like ATI's current chipsets. And I fully expect ATI to be on par or take the lead in performance in their next generation core logics. Thanks for helping me make my point.
"Try using a few more."
I have no reason to at this point, aside from Crossfire configurations, which I see no need for (SLI or Crossfire). NForce4 Ultra/SLI generally perform better (granted, not by much, but slightly), and suffer from less bugs. If they refresh it and make it superior, or if their next gen are as good or better, I certainly will. I have no loyalties to either company.
