GIGABYTE J1900N-D3V Visual Inspection

The J1900N-D3V due to the 10W SoC under the hood uses a passive cooler with plenty of surface area to direct heat away. It is interesting that if we compare this cooler to some of the power delivery heatsinks on mainstream boards, this looks more like a cooler than they do, even though those power delivery heatsinks might actually cost more. Because these motherboards fall under the $100 bracket, little attention is paid to the presentation, although GIGABYTE has at least synchronized the heat sink and the slots to match the PCB. Also for cost reasons, the PCB looks very busy – if an engineer can replace a component with two components and still save money, this becomes the mentality for this sort of design. Every component on board is also surrounded by a white box so the automated machines can be guided onto where each IC or resistor should be.

GIGABYTE has placed the 24-pin ATX and 4-pin CPU power connectors at the edge of the motherboard making it easier to use this board in a case, something their mainstream Z77 and Z87 mini-ITX motherboards had trouble doing. At the top of the board with these connectors are the front panel header, an LPT header and a 4-pin SYS fan header. The motherboard has only two fan headers on board – one just above the SoC and a 3-pin to the left of the SoC, with this one labeled ‘CPU’. This is next to a USB 2.0 header in white.

On the right hand side we have a stacked SO-DIMM arrangement, with each module being placed the opposite way round to each other. As with upgradable laptop SO-DIMM slots, the slots have latches to fasten the modules in place. Below this is a mini-PCIe slot, suitable for a half-length WiFi module which is not included. We also get a built in speaker on the bottom right, something we tend not to see in $100+ products.

At the bottom of the board we have the PCI slot which comes from a PCIe to PCI bridge, with two SATA ports above it. This is a frustrating place to put the SATA ports, as it means a user with two devices will have to reach over the motherboard in order to connect them. The connectors also face the same direction, and if the user decides to have locking cables, the cable on the left needs to be removed before the one on the right can be taken out. To the left of these SATA ports is the front panel audio header.

The rear panel has separate PS/2 connectors for a mouse and keyboard, along with two COM ports, a VGA port and a DVI-D port. GIGABYTE has implemented four USB 3.0 ports by using a Renesas hub, and the two Realtek NICs provide an upgrade over the standard configuration. The 2.1 audio solution is provided by a Realtek ALC887 codec.

Board Features

GIGABYTE J1900N-D3V
Price Link
Size Mini-ITX
CPU Interface Soldered
Chipset Bay Trail-D Quad Core
Memory Slots Two DDR3/L SO-DIMM slots supporting up to 8GB
Up to Dual Channel, 1333 MHz
Video Outputs VGA (2560x1600)
DVI-D (1920x1080)
Onboard LAN 2 x Realtek
Onboard Audio Realtek ALC887
Expansion Slots 1 x PCI
1 x Mini-PCIe
Onboard SATA/RAID 2 x SATA 3 Gbps
USB 3.0 4 x USB 3.0 (Hub via SoC) [rear panel]
Onboard 2 x SATA
2 x Fan Header
1 x LPT Header
1 x USB 2.0 Header
1 x mini-PCIe
Front Panel Header
Front Audio Header
Power Connectors 1 x 24-pin ATX
1 x 4-pin CPU
Fan Headers 1 x CPU (4-pin)
1 x SYS (4-pin)
IO Panel 1 x PS/2 Mouse Port
1 x PS/2 Keyboard Port
2 x COM Ports
VGA
DVI-D
4 x USB 3.0
2 x Realtek Network Ports
Audio Jacks
Product Page Link

The GIGABYTE J1900N-D3V splits the four PCIe lanes from the chipset into a mini-PCIe slot, a PCIe to PCI bridge and two Realtek NICs. This is perhaps a good scenario for a machine that needs to be networked, although storage users miss out. Other configurations might have revolved around a SATA controller, a PCIe 2.0 x1 slot or a true USB 3.0 controller. But at the price point, users have to bring along their own WiFi and antenna bracket.

Bay Trail-D Overview GIGABYTE J1900N-D3V BIOS and Software
POST A COMMENT

60 Comments

View All Comments

  • HiTechObsessed - Friday, October 17, 2014 - link

    Should be a big hit with console users. That lower frame-rate for gaming should be super-cinematic then! Reply
  • XZerg - Friday, October 17, 2014 - link

    The power consumption delta is something I do not like. I rather see the idle and load instead. The idle tells me how much my "nas/htpc" system will consume while doing nothing. the load tells me what is the absolute worse it will consume. this allows me to weigh the options better on power consumption basis, not the delta as that's not what is going to matter when the system is going to be idling for prolonged periods. Reply
  • looncraz - Friday, October 17, 2014 - link

    +1

    In this light, one extra watt for the faster performing (barely, but true, and much more so in gaming) 25W AMD option looks to be the real winner. Cheaper, only an extra watt of power used (in the delta measure anyway), etc... But, in the real world, the AMD may idle at 16W and the intel will idle at 8W... which may matter if planning on running multiple systems and using UPS protection such as in an office/school/government environment.
    Reply
  • jospoortvliet - Friday, October 17, 2014 - link

    Good news is that most reviews I've seen put the AMD at a lower idle power than the Intel. The total load is closer than the difference graph makes it look, no idea why those are used... Reply
  • maco - Friday, October 17, 2014 - link

    Agreed, I'd like to see idle and load graphs too. I tend to leave a computer on doing light server tasks, so idle power is an important metric for me. Reply
  • danzig - Saturday, October 18, 2014 - link

    Same here concerning the power graphs. If there is a revision or edit of the page, could you please put more power consumption info up, if you have the data? Reply
  • KWIE - Monday, October 20, 2014 - link

    I use mine as a NAS also, with FreeNAS/Plex. I haven't clocked it yet higher than 19W. Reply
  • Guspaz - Monday, October 20, 2014 - link

    Agreed the delta numbers are useless. A system with an idle/load power consumption of 10W/20W would show up the same in the chart as a system with an idle/load power consumption of 500/510W, as admittedly contrived as that scenario is. But something like 10/20 versus 20/30 isn't so crazy. Reply
  • Guspaz - Monday, October 20, 2014 - link

    Also, the graph says "lower is better", but that's not true at all. Given two processors with equal load power draw, the processor with the lower idle power draw "wins" that benchmark, but that means you want the processor with the *BIGGER* delta, not the smaller delta! Reply
  • AJSB - Friday, October 17, 2014 - link

    AMD AM1 APUs based on Kabini simply CRUSH these abortions as for light gaming goes (and BTW, 1280x1024 is near 30% more pixels than of a 1366x768 monitor)....wait for AMD Beema AM1 ;) Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now