![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Anandtech tests DDR1 with Conroe
- Thread starter brucedeluxe169
- Start date
robberbaron
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2004
- Messages
- 6,101
Poncho said:
The intel onboard 3000 will be comparable to the 6800GT? Maybe "feature" wise, but not perfomance.
Hahahahaha, you are beyond help.
pigpen said:
No it wouldn't, unless you gave away your old DDR RAM for free. 2GB of fast DDR2 is dirt cheap now.
osalcido said:
I'm still not recommending this board, but you should know there is a negligible performance difference between PCI-E x4 and x16. It's a non-issue. Some people will claim it makes a difference on a monster video card like the 7950 (doubtful), but nobody interested in this ASRock budget board is going to be buying a 7950. I doubt it's even supported by the BIOS anyway.
InorganicMatter
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2004
- Messages
- 15,461
He is talking about the new Intel X3000 graphics controller. I think it is comparable/slightly faster than current 6150 and X300 onboard graphics. Pretty much just enough to run Windows Vista with all the eye candy on.Shodai said:
This thing is on a via board... with crappy interface that has ddr and ddr 2, AGP, PCIx16... I mean can we really believe that ddr2 are useless for conroe on all chipsets or just this one?
The asrock falls behind on other 965p, 975 boards by a hefty margin... Perhaps it's because it has crappy memory controller that controls ddr 1 and 2.
The asrock falls behind on other 965p, 975 boards by a hefty margin... Perhaps it's because it has crappy memory controller that controls ddr 1 and 2.
deathBOB said:I also call BS at that statement. A 6800GT is still a lower midrange card and integrated graphics have never been anything but very low end, even if they do support advanced features.
Nice to know I can keep the 2gb of DDR400 I got a Fry's for $99.
6800GT is not a low end but a midrange card... Onboard graphics 2 or 4 pixel pipes will not destroy no 16pipe 6800gt... Lot of people would stop buying video cards if this ever happened...
aldamon said:
It would add onto the initial cost. THe point of a board like this is to make an uninterupted, gradual upgrade. I could sell my DDR1 to get money for DDR2, but what the hell do i do in between that time? Not an issue with that ASRock board. And as this article shows, i'd be getting the same performance anywoo.
Marvelous said:
I believe that's the point.
Really... from a platform standpoint this would be a great deal. Intel already has 50+% of the graphics market, this would increase that by quite a bit. Everything that I have heard, and everybody I have talked to has said that the X3000 series Intel Graphics can go head to head with a 6800. We'll see what it does when there are reviews on it... but I can assure you that this core will perform MUCH better than previous ones, and even those were pretty good.pigpen said:
No, the point of this board is to be as cheap as possible.
pigpen said:
I already said upgrading to DDR2 will add to your cost, but it's just not going to be $150 as you said above. Since we've established that the upgrade to DDR2 will not be expensive for you, I can deduce that what's really going on here is you don't want to pay $150 for a motherboard. You shouldn't think like that. What you should be thinking is the Gigabyte DS3 is only $70 more than the 775Dual-VSTA and you would be getting a lot more for your money. Combine the improved motherboard with what will probably be ~$30 upgrade to DDR2 (after selling your existing RAM) and you have a far better setup with more overclocking options and DDR2 for only $100 more.
Is saving $100 worth the hassle of being stuck with a VIA chipset, DDR1, and virtually no overclocking ability? Do you really want to hold onto DDR1 while it depreciates more and more? I think the answer is clear.
Good luck though!
aldamon said:
No, the point of the board is that i can keep my DDR1 and AGP graphics card, while upgrading to a conroe / DDR2 / and pci-e board all at the same time. No other board on the market can do that. The fact that it's cheap is only a plus. Intel chipsets and their stability have always been a huge factor in chosing an Intel system. I would absolutely end up with an intel chipset board eventually. This would only be short term.
aldamon said:
I'm on an IC7 max 3 now. Sure it's dated, but in it's day it was the most expensive board on the market. I don't have a problem paying for a good motherboard. What you are leaving out of your equation of switching to the gigabyte DS3 now is the cost for a new pci-e graphics card and DDR2, which i would need before being able to fire up a conroe.
aldamon said:
Anandtech showed with the article, the DDR2 whould be the last thing to upgrade, as it really shows no performance increases from what i have now.
Poncho said:I believe that's the point.
Intel or X company tells you lot of things to buy their stuff... But I highly doubt that...
Intel might take 50% of the graphics card market because they build onboard cards built onto their motherboard... Most people don't play games on computers but actually work...
Intel's features might compete with 6800gt but it will not be fast as 6800gt... Just look at Intel's graphic market from the past... Unless they somehow pull a nice graphics card out of their hat it will be slower than radeon 9500....
Marvelous said:
First off I work for Intel so this is what I have heard from the teams that are working on it. Take it with a grain of salt fine...
Again... time will tell. But I can assure you that Intel is taking a new approach to the platform and the way this market is going.
Marvelous said:
Who said that this has happened over night? It's not like they are trying to compete with mid-high end cards..... it's just kinda happening. Look at the way media and OS is going. With HD video, Vista's abnormally high graphical requirements (for high settings), and DX10, etc there is a need for something of this magnitude with on-board since that's what most people buy. Media Center PCs, DVRs, etc are all driving it to this end... and Intel sees that and is moving. AMD is doing the same thing, they just don't have the money for R&D to design their own... hence the ATI deal. Realize as well that "mid range" now won't be "mid range" when vista comes out. Intel's just beating everybody to the punch.
Poncho said:
Well your trying to say like Intel has a graphics card that actually perform as much as 6800gt or something of that nature... Even an ATI200 crushes intel onboard graphics...
So your saying it will not compete in the 3d department now? That has been the trend from intel... Bunch of specs and no real performance... Unless you like playing games on lowest settings people will keep on buying ATI and Nvidia cards...
Intel will puch alright... The desktop and laptop OEM onboard department... but that's been the case from intel for over decades...
Marc Rein doesn't care for Intel's GPU efforts:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/5168320.stm
Gears of War
"If Intel exited the gaming market we would all be better off."
He said that PC gaming was in danger of being killed off altogether, leaving the industry "at the whim of Sony and Microsoft".
Many PC manufacturers use Intel integrated graphics chips instead of providing dedicated graphics hardware.
The low-cost chips are incapable of dealing with the graphics and computational power required for modern games.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/5168320.stm
Gears of War
"If Intel exited the gaming market we would all be better off."
He said that PC gaming was in danger of being killed off altogether, leaving the industry "at the whim of Sony and Microsoft".
Many PC manufacturers use Intel integrated graphics chips instead of providing dedicated graphics hardware.
The low-cost chips are incapable of dealing with the graphics and computational power required for modern games.
aldamon said:
Dear Marc,
PC gaming is going away anyway, and has been for awhile now.
with love,
Tutelary.
In all seriousness, this is a picture of an EB I ran for 4 years. This picture is right before the original xbox released (I have another picture with a newly delivered xbox display on the other wall with no xbox in it yet).
http://aycu14.webshots.com/image/1973/1905864131994434452_rs.jpg
There is 16 feet (horizontal) space there for current PC games, there is a 4 foot section for used games, the back was a productivity/MS area. This was all by corporate plan-o-gram in a mid range size store.
You will absolutely not find that in an EB or Gamestop anymore, and you will not find a current pc games section that large in many stores. My local best buy has a rather large productivity section with a smallish games section.
Thats not to say it isnt out there at someplace like CompUSA, but it proves the PC games market is disappearing rapidly. This wasnt very many years ago folks.
Marvelous said:
First off... have I ever said that 965's graphics will compete with high end cards? No. What I am saying is that the graphics on 965 will compete with the lower to mid range cards now. Of course... ATI's 1900 and nVidia's 7900 will be the mid range by the time vista comes out... but RIGHT NOW... it's comparable to 6800 series. Will it be the end all in gaming? of course not... I never said it was. All I'm saying is that this gen GPU is A LOT better than previous ones... and will compete with the "budget" gamer who doesn't want to spend $500 on a card... and maybe wants to upgrade in the future. Get a 965 with on-board, use it for a while, then upgrade. It'll play most/all of the games out now... about as good as a 6800. Is that really so hard to understand?
As for that article.... he's talking about older graphics since I doubt that he has used the latest... that's not even out right now (should be out real soon).
Poncho said:
But you're saying that 965 onboard graphics will compete with 6800series... A 16pipe card with 256 bit memory bus....
Onboard from intel's previous ones can't even compete with radeon 8500... I wonder how Intel is going to pull a 6800 compareable card within only one generation from previous...
Marvelous said:Nothing but a bunch of things written on a paper that it has similar specs 6800series...
A geforce 6200 has all those features.. Does that mean it perform similar to 6800gt?
Jesus Christ... bury your head in the sand some more please. Can't you just accept the fact that it is POSSIBLE and leave it at that?
Marvelous said:
I guess when you pump billions into a product you can't innovate and come up with something better. This all sounds like the same BS you heard from the other side when word of Conroe came out. "Oh... no way Intel can make something that good."
965 and Conroe from day 1 have been #1 priority for Intel. They have gone through a lot to get this product out and have it be a great platform that will last with the coming media boom. Is it really so hard to think that a product that was designed to work with software with high graphical requirements that is coming up next year.... that it wouldn't compete with a card that has been out for a year now? !!!!!!s I swear....Poncho said:I guess when you pump billions into a product you can't innovate and come up with something better. This all sounds like the same BS you heard from the other side when word of Conroe came out. "Oh... no way Intel can make something that good."
You must really love your company... Must be the stocks you invested...
Intel didn't do that overnight... They been building it up since pentium 3... Pentium 3 ------> Pentium M --------> core duo --------> duo core conroe.... Intel finally realized pentium 4 wasn't working so they went back and built up their pentium 3 architecture...
It took them decades and you can't just bring a card that competes with ATI and Nvidia overnight... They've also been building their architecture for years and assimilliated other companies to achieve where they're today.. Intel will surely make a budget onboard graphics card that will be hopefully have similar performance like 6800 but they're dreaming as usual...
Poncho said:I guess when you pump billions into a product you can't innovate and come up with something better. This all sounds like the same BS you heard from the other side when word of Conroe came out. "Oh... no way Intel can make something that good."
Poncho, some people just want to ague, let it go. I myself enjoy your posts. I find them very informative. As for myself I'll be looking forward to checking out this new board when it comes out.
Are you saying that is also has a pci express slot so when I want to up grade the graphics I will able to do so?
If so, for a budget minded individual such as myself with the rig I am using in my sig. This might be the way to go. It would save me from having to shell out the $$$ for a good pci express graphics card right away.
When will these intel boards hit the market? Any idea?
CpuMan said:
Everyboard that I have seen they still have a x16 slot for future upgrades. I know some OEMs build their systems without PCIe x16 slots sometimes... or at least they used to. The only thing thing is that you lose the on-board graphics when you put a card in... that's typical though.
CpuMan said:
For you it would probalby be an upgrade.
The 9600 non pros wern't that good to begin with... decent but far from high end. This looks like a great path for you if you are on a budget.CpuMan said:
Not sure... they are listed on Intel.com so I'm guessing very soon.
Poncho said:Everyboard that I have seen they still have a x16 slot for future upgrades. I know some OEMs build their systems without PCIe x16 slots sometimes... or at least they used to. The only thing thing is that you lose the on-board graphics when you put a card in... that's typical though.
For you it would probalby be an upgrade.
Not sure... they are listed on Intel.com so I'm guessing very soon.
Excellent info. One last question, any idea if these boards will allow a little overclocking on a e6300 or e6400? Not looking to do any huge ocing. But a little would be nice.
CpuMan said:
Not with Intel boards. Only the 975 offers that... but it doesn't have onboard video. I would imagine that other companies will be coming out with their boards with Intel's integrated graphics... but I have no idea on when that'll be. You should be able to use a clockgen to o/c though.
CpuMan said:
I'm not even arguing but stating facts here... There's no evidence intel is going to compete in the whole mid range market in the graphics dept. except on a sheet of paper. Intel's been doing that for years... how they are going to offer better solution than say from ATI or Nvidia...
So far intel has released i740, gma900, gma950 graphics... By their track record intel is not going to compete with anything remotely similar to 6800...
It might have the specs like usual but it will fall withing x300 graphics level of performance...
Poncho said:
I apologize for not taking "latest Intel Graphics" as referring to the 965 chipset. My bad. I understand now you're talking about the GMA X3000. Would have been nice for you to actually use the name in a sentence.
Having said that, the statement that it is comparable [read:equivalent] or "probably even better" than a 6800GT is absolute BS.
From the whitepaper you link:
The Intel® G965 Express chipsets that incorporates Intel® Graphics Media Accelerator X3000 runs at 667 MHz and supports a dual channel memory bandwidth of up to 12.8 GB/s and dynamic video memory of 384 MB.
The 6800GT has a memory bandwidth of 32GB/s. There is going to be no contest here.
So you suggest people wait to buy a non-overclockable board with 6200 Turbocache performance (at best), rather than buy a "crap board" made by VIA.
I've got one of those crap boards running with a E6400 @2.4Ghz, 1 gig of PC4000 ram @500, and an AGP 6800GT softmodded into a Quadro 4400. I'm nowhere near my OC limit yet.
There is no way I could buy any group of components that would match my Specviewperf 8.1 results for anything less than $2000. I'd need to buy a PCIE quadro $1500 (no softmod for PCIE's) a $150-$250 mobo, and $100-$150 for some DDRII ram. As it stands, I've made a complete upgrade from a Max3 and 2.4c northwood @3Ghz to a Conroe setup for a grand total of $366. My pifast score has gone from 1min18 sec to 26sec. 3dmark 01 gone from 18k - 26k.
I fail to see how you can say "nobody in their right mind should consider this board" about the Asrock Dual VSTA.