quote:

---

The JMicron fiascoes have hit every board manufacturer at one time or another and if you want to blame somebody then start at the doorstep of Intel for shipping a chipset without native IDE support before the market was ready for it.

---

Thats a understatement. The only thing i don't like about my 965 board is lack of IDE and the use of the jmicron junk.
One of the reasons I am waiting for more 650i boards and the ?last? ati chipset for Intel chips.

Reply

I second that. Intel has, unfortunately, a reputation for making drastic moves every now and then in a certain technological direction which it feels that everyone should head towards, and hurry - never mind if everyone else does not feel the same way about it, or if that direction is simply not ready for prime time; RDRAM, Itanic, BTX, and now removal of native IDE support stand testimony to that.

I can't speak for everyone of course, but JMicron isn't so bad, really, at least from personal experience... a string of systems using P5B Deluxe and P5B-E Plus motherboards have so far behaved quite well during setup and installation. Part of the problem probably lies in how well motherboard manufacturers implement the device in their design and how much effort they put in to make sure they get it right. As for the alternatives to JMicron, it's not too easy to find one that can match the JMB363 in terms of features... PCIe, 2 SATA II-compliant ports, 1 ATA-133 IDE interface in a compact, single-chip solution. Perhaps Silicon Image should step forward and make use of their excellent IP to create such a competitor, but I suspect they're focusing on HDMI right now....

Reply

It's one of the reasons I'd still chose i975x rather than i965 for a chipset. i975X still has native Intel IDE.

Due to recent nVidia chipset/board issues, and past issues with heat production, I'm not sure I'd choose them for an Intel board either, so that leaves the i975X as the only chipset I'd be comfortable with.

Reply

quote:

---

It's one of the reasons I'd still chose i975x rather than i965 for a chipset. i975X still has native Intel IDE.

---

Honestly, what in a new build would require and IDE interface..? eSATA is important and I am glad it's included. Abit has always made mobos dropping legacy devices no longer used by enthusiasts. Look at their old Abit "MAX" boards.

Why, in 2007 are manufacturers still using serial and parrallel I/O's..? Remove them completly and free the backplane for more useful eSATA, USB..etc










Reply

Obviously, you've never configured a Cisco router through its console port (which usually requires a serial port). And perhaps I don't want my list of optical drives confined to only SATA (currently Plextor and LiteOn are my only options, and I don't want one due to price and the other due to writing quality reasons).

There are also some known issues with using Symantec Ghost on the JMicron chipset. Unless I hear they are worked out, that's an important thing to me too, and so IDE is still important to me. Just because it isn't useful to you doesn't mean it isn't to a lot of others.

Reply

quote:

---

...Japanese sourced solid state capacitors ...

---

Oh no, that misnomer strikes again... capacitors which use solid aluminium electrolyte are properly called "solid aluminium electrolyte" or at least "solid aluminium"... there are no "solid state" capacitors since, in electronic parlance "solid state" is traditionally used to describe circuits that do not use vacuum tubes (electron flows in solid materials - the semiconductors within ICs - rather than vacuum/empty spaces such as in tubes).

It's a minor point on the face of it, but Anandtech is well-respected throughout the IT community; hence a mistake or misconception could potentially reach and misinform a great deal of readers (and even writers) out there. :)

Reply

Changed - not all of us are electronics experts. Solid state or solid electrolyte - is there a difference to the laymen of the world? ;)

Reply

I have used the terminology, "Conductive Polymer Aluminum Solid Capacitors" in past articles and received several emails asking why we do not use what the manufacturers state on their websites as that term was deemed confusing. :)

Reply

Part of the problem lies in the confusion about the various kinds of capacitors of that category.

Amongst the kind that we're concerned with on motherboards, graphics cards etc, we have the most basic: the aluminium electrolytic capacitor. Because this type started out with liquid electrolyte, the word "liquid" is generally omitted from the name as it is understood.

Then came the solid aluminium electrolytic capacitor, which replaced the liquid electrolyte with, well, a solid one - usually based on aluminium oxide. These are the type that we're nowadays excited about - the lack of liquid makes them more resistant to blow-outs and electrolyte leakage/dry-out, especially under prolonged, high temperature use. For short, they're sometimes referred to as merely "solid electrolytic" ("aluminium" is sometimes left out because, as noted above, the solid electrolyte is usually based on aluminium oxide and hence is understood as such) capacitors. To call them "solid capacitors" isn't totally useful because most capacitors are indeed solid objects :)

In conductive polymer capacitors, on the other hand, the dielectric is made from polymer foil (e.g. polypropylene, polyester, polystyrene, polycarbonate) coated with a layer of metal deposited on the surface. It follows that the basic conductive polymer capacitor has no liquid electrolyte inside - indeed there is no electroylte as the dielectric is purely the polymer foil.

However, manufacturers can and do mix in aluminium electrolyte with the polymer foil to improve certain performance characteristics; the electrolyte is often solid (rather than liquid) aluminium-based, hence "conductive polymer aluminium solid electrolytic capacitor".

As such, the exact names can mean quite distinct types of capacitors, and are not merely loose permutations of words like "electrolytic", "aluminium", "solid" and "polymer"... so if one wants to accurately describe a capacitor being used, one would need to double-check exactly what dielectric is being used in that capacitor :)

Reply

Well they (caps suitable for motherbards) are either AL electrolyte or solid polymer based.

Electrolyte caps are the more common type an actually contain electrolytic fluid which can leak when the cap fails. Polymer caps avoid that problem and also last longer -- to the laymen that would be the key difference.

Reply