POST A COMMENT

36 Comments

Back to Article

  • Tujan - Friday, October 07, 2005 - link

    But a ''ATI has had its integrated graphics chipsets on the market for over a year"?

    There are only limited ATI Intel 915 775 based Intel graphics chipsets.Nothing for the Dual-Core Intel based chipsets.

    The ATI chipsets for the AMD platform,are not so numerous as well. Of wich ATX does not enter the fray.

    Asus has an Intel ATI 775 chipset.Wich is more or less a 915 equivalent.While the war horse from MSI does the AMD side of things.

    Maybe,just maybe there is some OEM action wich nobody can see,nor tell of.For example,a large order from a manufacturer HP,Dell etc having been used. Then if Anantech where to resort to taking interest in such obscure OEM scews they would be back to benching HP vrs Dell vrs Emachine etc.

    I know your just wanting my wormy head to pop up.Like bait.For what bird,dont know right now.

    Have to see about the latest ATI retail chipsets when they come out.They win on AMD on the count of that AMD architecture.Sure they are better graphics than the last generation used on computers PCI and AGP slots. And I cant complain about somebody taking anything but the latest technology. 915/775.

    Dont see anything in the retail right now.For ATI.The Saphire board still does not light a search from a retail since a month later now.

    Somebody trying to bend my bugle ?

    Reply
  • DigitalFreak - Friday, October 07, 2005 - link

    My head hurts from trying to read that... :-) Reply
  • johnsonx - Friday, October 07, 2005 - link

    yeah, ditto that... ouch
    Reply
  • Aquila76 - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    I'm looking for an all-in-one board for a dual-boot personal web server/Old-skool gaming box, and this helped a lot. I'll probably go for the 6100 based board, as my main rig is an nForce4 and I'll keep parts 'all in the family'.

    One more thing (off topic): If I see that 64 second film contest 'waitlessness' guy floating on my screen one more time, I'm going to find where he lives and kill his family in front of him. That has got to be the single most annoying ad EVER. Who is the ad wizard who decided: "Yeah! Let's float our add across the ENTIRE SCREEN! That'll get noticed!"? DIAF, you rat-bastard!
    Reply
  • knisch - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    I know this seems stupid but I really want a matx board that performs at nForce4 Ultra levels w/ sata 300 and all that jazz. Is the 6100 that board? If I throw a GeForce 6800 in that thing can I expect to see the same performance as on a nForce4 Ultra?

    If so this would be a great way to get into 939 for me. I can live with games on my socket A for a while and use the integrated graphics until I have enough dough for a nice pci-e video card.
    Reply
  • johnsonx - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    This is such a board, though perhaps you would be better to wait for a board with the 430 Southbridge, rather than the 410 as this one has. That one gets you 4 SATA-300 ports rather than 2, more RAID levels, and Gigabit ethernet.

    Like this one:

    http://www.foxconnchannel.com/products_motherboard...">

    This also has the higher-clocked 6150 GFX... I dunno if you can actually buy this anywhere yet, but surely it will be available soon.

    Foxconn does also have some MicroATX regular NForce4 boards, but none with SATA-300.
    Reply
  • knisch - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    Thanks. I think I will be making a purchase as soon as a decent 430 based board comes out. Reply
  • johnsonx - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    Not sure why the link disappeared there... let's try again:

    http://www.foxconnchannel.com/products_motherboard...">http://www.foxconnchannel.com/products_motherboard...


    Reply
  • HarbingerM - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    The ATI board can very alot if it is useing a mix of side port and Hypermemory. The review does not say which. I notic alot of the ati board do not have any side port but the jetway a210gdms-pro
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82...">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82...
    has 32M. It wil effect the test and senice most board do not have this feature it be nice to see the test with side port on and with it off. That will help to compare but right now the 6100 has the lower price :-). But if the side port helps to lower cpu and system memory overhead it might be worth it.
    Reply
  • Wesley Fink - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    There is no sideport memory on the Grouper board. The earlier RS480 Reference for Integrated Graphics did have 16MB of sideport memory, but Grouper is a later board without sideport memory - UMA only.

    As stated in the launch review and nVidia press kits, the GeForce 61xx will ONLY support UMA or shared memory. It will NOT support dedicated memory.

    We examined the effect of sideport memory in the RS480 launch, and Anand reported the small impact of sideport memory on performance. You can review those results at http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...">http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?....
    Reply
  • johnsonx - Friday, October 07, 2005 - link

    Since the only testing we have for Xpress 200 with Sideport Memory was done nearly a year ago on pre-release reference hardware, with early drivers and on only 2 games at one resolution, perhaps some new tests are in order? (as always, easy for me to say since I don't have to do any of the work!)

    The complete AMD integrated video test, which would be very informative:

    Socket 939 & 754 GeForce6100
    Socket 939 & 754 GeForce6150
    Socket 939 & 754 Xpress200
    Socket 939 & 754 Xpress200 w/32Mb Sideport (UMA interleaved)
    Socket 754 K8M800
    Socket 754 760GX

    For processors, it should be Sempron64 2600+ (on 754), Athlon64 3200+ (on both 754 & 939), and finally Athlon64 4000+ (on 939). That'd be two CPUs for each board.

    So that's 20 board/cpu/video memory configurations. No sweat, right?

    What's the point of all this testing? Simple. Which platform gives the best integrated gfx performance and which gives the best integrated graphics value? Is the ATI Sideport Memory worth the added cost ($20) vs UMA alone?

    Reply
  • DigitalFreak - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    Wesley,

    Any idea when the 6150 based boards will be available? Also, any info on DFI 6150 boards?
    Reply
  • johnsonx - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    Yeah, you're right... the JetWay RS480 PRO boards all have 32Mb of dedicated video RAM.

    Anandtech, please test!

    Is there any info on whether GeForce 6100 boards can or will be equipped with dedicated RAM as well?
    Reply
  • Cybercat - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the reference grouper board they were using did have a small bit of dedicated memory onboard.

    And since NVIDIA was the first with the memory fetching technique (TurboCache) I would think they could do it with their chipset as well. However it may be that TurboCache isn't a completely driver-enabled feature like HyperMemory is with ATI. The other problem is that in order to incorporate some dedicated memory, it requires quite a bit of extra space on the board, and when dealing with mini-ATX, you don't have a lot of space to work with. Many board makers don't see the speed boost as a worthwhile justification for the extra leveraging they would have to do, considering that most onboard is only there for 2D functionality primarily, with little consideration for 3D performance given the sort of market the chipset is aimed at.
    Reply
  • johnsonx - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    As near as I can tell from consulting several past AT articles concerning the Grouper reference board, it looks like it does NOT have Sideport memory. The original Bullhead board did have 16Mb sideport memory, and the AT article for that board even included benches of various memory configs (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...">here). None of the articles that mention the Grouper board mention Sideport, and I don't see any memory chips in the photos of the Grouper board (or of the Sapphire Pure Innovation board, which follows the Grouper reference design). The chip was easy to spot on the original Bullhead board photos, as they are on the Jetway board photos.

    Perhaps Wesley could clarify whether the Grouper board being tested does or does not have Sideport memory?
    Reply
  • DigitalFreak - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    Read the article Wesley referred to. You gain at most 2 fps with the 16MB of sideport memory on the ATI board. Reply
  • johnsonx - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    if 2d is the only issue, save your money and buy Via K8M800 or SiS 760GX... ATI and Nvidia market these things as 3d, and they do a pretty competent job of it as well.

    as to all the extra space required, it appears to be only 2 small memory chips. They're almost tough to spot on the Jetway Pro boards.

    Reply
  • HarbingerM - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    So it looks like they are compareing a $75 tforce 6100 vs $95 Xpress 200

    http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/Wishlist/WishS...">http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/Wis...700496&a...

    That so with price added the 6100 dose not look that bad compared to geting a xpress 200 with sideport. If they would test it UMA only then I think the 6100 might be much more ahead. Toms did some testing with the 3 setings of sideport memory and thier board only had 16M and there was a noticable difrence in game and in GUI because of not stealing all of the cpu memory bandwith. With the price difrence of $20 it is hard to go with the xpress200 it lacks so much. And if the benchmarks where on a board with 32M sideport it make the tforce6100 that much better. If not it put them at the same preformance level. So that only the features like full speed USB and SATA300.
    Reply
  • yacoub - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    Worst photoshop of a "2" ever. Reply
  • Wesley Fink - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    I was embarrassed by my "2" so I redid it :-) At the last minute ATI told me they didn't have any usable images of the RS482, so I did a 2-minute improvise. After your comment I did it as it should have been in Photoshop. Reply
  • yacoub - Friday, October 07, 2005 - link

    Werd. Well for future reference it would show more integrity to explain that in the article instead of trying to pass a falsified 480 picture off as a 482. While the 482 may very much look just like your photoshopped picture, you aren't being true to your readers and that wouldn't pass muster at a real news outlet. You might even be fired for it if they have high enough standards. Just something to keep in mind if you are seeking a career in journalism. Your article is very good otherwise. Reply
  • yacoub - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    Hahah, they actually fixed it now with a better pic. Thanks for correcting that, it was pretty shoddy. :) Reply
  • deathwalker - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    I'm sorry, but perhaps I'm just out of touch with the real world..or then perhaps "AT" is!! Somehow I just don't see benching a Integrated Graphics solution with a AMD64 4000+ processor as providing a set of bench marks that most users of Integrated Graphics solutions will be able to relate to. I don't think I'm far off the mark in my assessment that very few if any users of such a graphics solution will be using what amounts to the about the highest performing CPU solution on the market. We see this time and again with "AT"...not matching up appropriate hardware solutions vs. real world enviroment useage. I think it renders these test results nearly useless for someone that is "really" interested in this type of graphics solution. Harsh opinion I know...but...at least it's mine. Reply
  • Wesley Fink - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    The 4000+ is hardly top end any more, it is mid-range. Current selling price is $368 at New Egg. The 3000+ is $146, the 3200+ is $190 and the 3500+ $219. The 4200+, 4400+, 4600+. 4800+ and FX57 occupy the $473 to $1000+ price space.

    That's not really the point though. The 4000+ has been our standard for AMD benchmarking for a while. The capabilities of the test 4000+ chips are well known, so test results are easier to compare to previous test results and put in perspective.
    Reply
  • deathwalker - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    Wesley...thanks for taking time to respond to my post. I may not be in 100% agreement but your position on this test setup is better understood after a little reflection. Reply
  • glennpratt - Friday, October 07, 2005 - link

    I think thier is a ton of interest in these boards from the HTPC crowd, not just budget...

    Also, you should note that in ANY modern game this thing will be totally GPU bound.
    Reply
  • R3MF - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    i'd love MSI to release an s280 with an 25W 2GHz Turion and a 6150/430 chipset. Reply
  • Brian23 - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    I'm glad ATI has a good hold on the integrated video market. As much as I like Nvidia cards, I'd hate it if Nvidia became a monopoly.

    I myself am supporting ATI. I just bought a X800GTO2 because the price was too good to pass up. I'm sure that this video card will be short lived though. ATI wants to make money, not sell excelent cards for cheap. Honestly, if there was a similar deal with a 7800 card, I would have bought Nvidia, but hey, I got a fast card for cheap.
    Reply
  • bob661 - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    Bang for the buck bro...that's what it's all about. Reply
  • johnsonx - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    Could AT perhaps get their hands on and test a GeForce 6100 and Xpress 200 for Socket 754, perhaps using both a low-end Sempron and a mid-range A64 (say a 2600 and a 3200)? It would be interesting to see what effect single-channel DDR will have on the graphics performance, and if it will hurt one chipset more than the other. Such a comparo might also require re-testing the S939 boards with a 3200 as well, just to get an apples-to-apples comparo.

    Myself, I found it quite odd that almost all available Xpress 200 boards were and are Socket-939 (for the first 9 months or so, there were NO socket 754 Xpress 200 boards actually available to buy, at least not in the USA, and even now there's 1 or maybe 2). Integrated graphics are low-end solutions by definition, while socket-939 chips are mid-range at a minimum (hell, to me socket 939 is the exotic high-end, but that's me...).

    I was pleased that Biostar shipped socket-754 and 939 T6100 boards almost simultaneously, and I have two on the shelf already waiting to be installed with Sempron64 2600+ cpus.

    I do realize that at some point next year, performance A64's will go to socket M2, and then Sempron64s will eventually transition to 939, but that's got to be at least a year away... socket 939 integrated gfx solutions don't make much sense until then.

    Reply
  • Cybercat - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82...">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82... Reply
  • Cybercat - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    Oh, nevermind, I read that wrong. Reply
  • pvfcm - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    maybe the paragraph saying nvidia has no AMD integrated graphics experience or something to that effect should say nvidia's reintroducing AMD integrated graphics. nforce 2 had integrated graphics (though that's not a recent chipset and not for K8 but whatever, fact remains at one time they did have integrated graphics... i think) Reply
  • southpawuni - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    Yes they did.

    Both the Nforce1 and 2.
    Nforce1 used a GF2MX and NF2 used a GF4MX. Both DX7 solutions, with the GF4MX being a faster GF2MX essentially.
    Reply
  • Cybercat - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    yeah, they didn't implement the (lower IQ) optimizations and plus we thought we'd bump the clockspeeds a bit....like 40%


    NOW see we're winning!

    /ATI spokesman
    Reply
  • Leper Messiah - Thursday, October 06, 2005 - link

    FTI Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now