page 3 ... this a DFI or Epox board??


The basic layout of the DFI is generally excellent, with some standout elements and a few glaring layout faults.


Reply

Why not straight to nf4?????

Reply

nF4 is PCIe only not AGP. nF3 and nF4 are virtually identical other than AGP vs. PCIe.

Reply

#2, AGP

Many people sunk $400-$600 in new AGP cards and want to use them. Many cards arnt PCIe. Basically NF4 probably won't support the graphics standard 98% of people have.


Wes, Where are the real enthusiast boards? Ya know ASUS/ABIT/DFI :( Hard to believe MSI has the best NF3 board still.

Reply

Tell me about it. I really don't want an MSI board but its basically the only option right now. DFI and Abit need to get their arse in gear quick. Mmmm, socket 939 LanParty board.....that would be my future board right there.

Reply

I think you should change the title a little bit... kinda misleading to say "Epox 9NDA3+: New Choice for Socket 939" You should write Epox 9NDA3+: A New Choice for Socket 939. I find it to be a little misleading... just my input!

Shermie

Reply

Since it didn't get answered in the last article comments, I guess it's worth repeating (especially since the same results keep showing up):

Wesley,

I'm wondering why the dvd2avi divx 5.1.1 show such close results here. With basically the same machines on hardocp, they show the athlon64 beating Intel's best by HUGE margins (like 20% faster than the 3.6 and almost the same over the 3.4ee)

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=Njc1LDM=

You guys showed the same thing no too long ago, but I can't find the article now. The paragraph under the graphs of the A64 winning said Intel lost the last thing they used to win in the benches. The article appears gone? What happened here, why so different from dvd2avi results at hardocp? They used the same divx 5.1.1 so it's not the encoder or the frontend. Heck even the 3500+ dominated the 3.6 and 3.4ee (more than 10%).

Whatever it is, I think a bit of research needs to be done on what's best for AMD, and what's best for Intel and pit them against each other. Clearly AMD people would run the way hardocp does (though it looks no different than what's used here). While you state you can show whatever you want, perhaps you should be showing the BEST for each platform. Would people really go home and run in a way that makes their cpu look like crap?

When you're talking about cutting 20% off of encoding, that adds up to a lot of time. I'd argue with the statement about divx 5.1.1 exploiting sse3 and making Intel a usual winner. Hardocp has been using 5.1.1 and A64's kill p4's with it (and have for a long time on their site). Is it AutoGK that throws things out of whack? Does it favor Intel so much that it causes a 20+ percent reversal? If it's truly based on dvd2avi how could it be so far out of whack compared to hardocp's scores? I think your readers would want to know which way to encode the fastest with whichever cpu they choose. Why would people want to know what the middle ground is and lose 20% cpu performance? Maybe Xmpeg for Intel, and pure dvd2avi for AMD?


Reply

I've noticed this a lot on this and other hardware review websites... it makes me think that motherboard companies pay these sites to review their products. What I'm talking about are comments such as "The basic layout of the Epox is generally excellent, with some standout elements and a few glaring layout faults." Before reading this line I already noticed the PSU ATX connector in an ugly location, and I'm sure no one would agree that this is "generally excellent". Now, how can something tbe "generally excellent" yet still have "glaring faults"? It doesn't make any sense to me. You see this a lot on hardocp as well. There'll be a major fault or issue with a product, but they always come back with (and I'm paraphrasing here) "but other than that, it's overall excellent". If something is truly "excellent" then it doesn't have any faults, otherwise it's just average or mediocre. Okay, rant over!

Reply

Hi Anand, please regard the fact that many people wont/dont buy the expensive RAM you are testing with. As A64 will do just as fine using HTT/Ram dividers and 200 mhz PC3200 ram at very tight timings (2-2-2-5) and is not like the previous Athlon (XP) model.

As a note to this Epox review, it would be very nice indeed if you didnt use 1:1 HTT/RAM since you would then be able to show what kind of FSB this mobo truly allows for. You did the same in the A64 value and overclocking article which is a shame imho.

Best Regards Mikkel Nielsen.

Reply

With the nforce 4 chipset boards just around the corner, it's probably wise to simply wait for those. Unless you have a significant investment in a video card you want to protect (which a lot of people do), you can just go straight to nv4 instead of getting one of these nv3 boards. If you have a great vid card you want to keep using, then nv3 939 is a relatively good path.

Reply