Motherboard for P4.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

Hi,

Having had such great replies about which processor to buy, now is my
chance to ask about which motherboard.

I've decided to get a Pentium 4 3.0E Ghz 800Mhz Prescott CPU, but my
supplier (who will be doing the actual system build) has loads of P4
motherboards. I've narrowed it down to these 9.

I'm looking for reliability, some overclocking, ability to take decent
RAM, but I really have no idea how to choose between these! Perhaps
someone who knows a lot more about the issues at stake can advise me.

Abit IC7-G Intel 875 Motherboard - £102.11
Abit IC7 Intel 875P P4 Motherboard - £77.41
Asus P4C800-E Deluxe Intel 875P Canterwood Motherboard - £130.28
Asus P5GDC Deluxe Intel 915P Sck 775 Motherboard - £116.84
Asus P4S800D-E Deluxe SiS®655TX P4 Motherboard - £70.24
Epox EP-4PDA2V Socket 478 Motherboard inc EasyBay - £83.48
Epox EP-4PDA5+ Intel 865PE P4 Motherboard - £75.39
Gigabyte GA-8I915P-PRO PCI Express Socket 775 Motherboard - £88.83
Gigabyte GA-8IPE1000 Pro2 Intel P4 2004 GT Edition Motherboard - £77.64

Thanks and regards,

MS

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

Just as an aside... which motherboards come highly recommended for the
Athlon 64 3000?

Thanks,

MS

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2063&p=1

MS wrote:

> Just as an aside... which motherboards come highly recommended for the
> Athlon 64 3000?
>
> Thanks,
>
> MS

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

"MS" <matthews@mailsnare.---nojunktakeout---.net> wrote in message
news:rrbOc.10903$kc.110475394@news-text.cableinet.net...
> Just as an aside... which motherboards come highly recommended for the
> Athlon 64 3000?
>
> Thanks,
>
> MS

MSI K8T NEO -Dave

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

"MS" <matthews@mailsnare.---nojunktakeout---.net> wrote in message
news:AIaOc.10867$YJ7.110110973@news-text.cableinet.net...
> Hi,
>
> Having had such great replies about which processor to buy, now is my
> chance to ask about which motherboard.
>
> I've decided to get a Pentium 4 3.0E Ghz 800Mhz Prescott CPU, but my
> supplier (who will be doing the actual system build) has loads of P4
> motherboards. I've narrowed it down to these 9.
>
> I'm looking for reliability, some overclocking, ability to take decent
> RAM, but I really have no idea how to choose between these! Perhaps
> someone who knows a lot more about the issues at stake can advise me.
>
> Abit IC7-G Intel 875 Motherboard - £102.11
> Abit IC7 Intel 875P P4 Motherboard - £77.41
> Asus P4C800-E Deluxe Intel 875P Canterwood Motherboard - £130.28
> Asus P5GDC Deluxe Intel 915P Sck 775 Motherboard - £116.84
> Asus P4S800D-E Deluxe SiS®655TX P4 Motherboard - £70.24
> Epox EP-4PDA2V Socket 478 Motherboard inc EasyBay - £83.48
> Epox EP-4PDA5+ Intel 865PE P4 Motherboard - £75.39
> Gigabyte GA-8I915P-PRO PCI Express Socket 775 Motherboard - £88.83
> Gigabyte GA-8IPE1000 Pro2 Intel P4 2004 GT Edition Motherboard - £77.64
>
> Thanks and regards,
>
> MS
These people are all missing the point here...

You already got a prescott cpu.
Would've been better to get a northwood.
But if you want a good board, get either MSI or Gigabyte with Dual Bios.
Dual bios can be very nice, but you might not know that intill something
goes wrong.
I cant think right, I'm a bit drunk.

Denny. ;-)

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

Steve Pearce wrote:
>
> On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 17:45:04 GMT, MS
> <matthews@mailsnare.---nojunktakeout---.net> wrote:
>
> >Hi,
> >
> >Having had such great replies about which processor to buy, now is my
> >chance to ask about which motherboard.
> >
> >I've decided to get a Pentium 4 3.0E Ghz 800Mhz Prescott CPU, but my
> >supplier (who will be doing the actual system build) has loads of P4
> >motherboards. I've narrowed it down to these 9.
> >
>
> I've used a Gigabyte GA-8IPE1000g with that processor with good
> results, the "pro" version should be just as good.

I have just built using Gigabyte GA-8IK1100 from a computer fair. This
board is slightly better, using 875P chipset instead of 865P. But all
Gigabytes are nice and stable and well documented. However, there is a fix
around I've read about, where you can have PAT (Intel's Performance
Acceleration Technology) which effectively makes the 865P into the 875P.
This board was inexpensive £87, but minor point is that IDE is ATA100
not ATA 133, although the board has two SATA ports which makes the ATA100
a non issue.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 18:27:22 GMT, MS
<matthews@mailsnare.---nojunktakeout---.net> wrote:


>The PC will be running XP Pro and its most 'demanding' role will be doing
>video editing and associated tasks. Wouldn't the P4 be better at doing this?

Yes.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

"maggot" <maggot@no.email> wrote in message
news:gd6lg0da1b15n130f6rbe1pa9giebpd8dp@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 15:27:23 -0400, "Dave C." <mdupre@sff.net> wrote:
>
>
> >MSI K8T NEO -Dave
> >
>
> VIA? Not in this house.

Why? You got something against incredibly high 3DMark scores in an
extremely stable system? -Dave

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

"Dave C." wrote:
>
> "maggot" <maggot@no.email> wrote in message
> news:gd6lg0da1b15n130f6rbe1pa9giebpd8dp@4ax.com...
> > On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 15:27:23 -0400, "Dave C." <mdupre@sff.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> > >MSI K8T NEO -Dave
> > >
> >
> > VIA? Not in this house.
>
> Why? You got something against incredibly high 3DMark scores in an
> extremely stable system? -Dave

The small intrinsic speed differences between motherboards means that
manufacturers can sometimes get an edge by fsb trickery. See e.g.

http://www6.tomshardware.com/mothe [...] kery_afoot

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

>
> VIA is often very unstable. Very bad reputation.
>

AMD is often very unstable. Very bad reputation. (were you deliberately
trying to sound like an idiot?) -Dave

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 17:11:05 -0400, "Dave C." <mdupre@sff.net> wrote:

> > VIA is often very unstable. Very bad reputation.
> >
>
> AMD is often very unstable. Very bad reputation.
> (were you deliberately trying to sound like an idiot?) -Dave

No idiot. Only know things.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

Ken <___ken3@telia.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 17:11:05 -0400, "Dave C." <mdupre@sff.net> wrote:
>
>> > VIA is often very unstable. Very bad reputation.
>> >
>>
>> AMD is often very unstable. Very bad reputation.
>> (were you deliberately trying to sound like an idiot?) -Dave
>
>No idiot. Only know things.

Oooh, can i read your paper on the subject? How large was your sample?


Tim
--
Google is not the only search engine.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

"Ken" <___ken3@telia.com> wrote in message
news:rielg0llgmgdejdjgv7r10o8n97ugjafvu@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 17:11:05 -0400, "Dave C." <mdupre@sff.net> wrote:
>
> >> VIA is often very unstable. Very bad reputation.
> >
> No idiot. Only know things.
> And never use AMD processors.
>

Whoa. I can't believe what I'm seeing. ONE GUY posts "via is often very
unstable", and then tops it off with "never use AMD processors". If you're
not a troll, I'd be tempted to killfile you. Only problem is, if I killfile
you, you'll still be spewing such garbage to folks in this ng who don't know
better. Get a clue, or ask for help. Don't post absolutes that are
misleading at best and FALSE at worst. -Dave (would gladly put a
self-built via chipset AMD processor system up against any system, in any
kind of test you can imagine . . . but then I do know a LITTLE about
hardware)

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

Ken <___ken3@telia.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 17:32:09 -0400, "Dave C." <mdupre@sff.net> wrote:
>
>> Whoa. I can't believe what I'm seeing. ONE GUY posts "via is often very
>> unstable", and then tops it off with "never use AMD processors". If you're
>> not a troll, I'd be tempted to killfile you. Only problem is, if I killfile
>> you, you'll still be spewing such garbage to folks in this ng who don't know
>> better. Get a clue, or ask for help. Don't post absolutes that are
>> misleading at best and FALSE at worst. -Dave (would gladly put a
>> self-built via chipset AMD processor system up against any system, in any
>> kind of test you can imagine . . . but then I do know a LITTLE about
>> hardware)
>
>You are now in my killfile.

ROTFLMAO

I expect I'll be joining Dave soon. I just hope my poxy AMD system
(NF2) doesn't bomb out on me before I get to see the post. Of course
that's assuming the AMD + VIA system on the other side of the desk
doesn't blow up and kill everyone in the house first.


Tim
--
Google is not the only search engine.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

"Dave C." wrote:

> >
> > VIA is often very unstable. Very bad reputation.
> >
>
> AMD is often very unstable.

Do you have any statistical evidence of that? I doubt that you
could provide any.One can build an ustable system with an Intel
processor or with an AMD processor if they don't know what they
are doing.

> Very bad reputation. (were you deliberately
> trying to sound like an idiot?) -Dave

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

JK wrote:
>
> "Dave C." wrote:
>
> > >
> > > VIA is often very unstable. Very bad reputation.
> > >
> >
> > AMD is often very unstable.
>
> Do you have any statistical evidence of that? I doubt that you
> could provide any.One can build an ustable system with an Intel
> processor or with an AMD processor if they don't know what they
> are doing.

And one can build a stable cost effective system with an Intel and
possibly with an AMD.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

Dennis E Strausser Jr wrote:
>
> "Johannes H Andersen" <johs@nsuvuooiaiosizefitterwiuoveswernuaz.com> wrote
> in message news:410AF477.32FAE761@nsuvuooiaiosizefitterwiuoveswernuaz.com...
> >
> >
> > JK wrote:
> > >
> > > The dual channel of the P4 is relatively slow though since the
> > > memory controller is not on the chip. Look at the actual benchmarks
> > > comparing the two. The article has benchmarks for both socket
> > > 754 and socket 939 Athlon 64 chips.
> > >
> > > http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipse [...] i=2065&p=1
> >
> > So?
> >
> > The dual channel memory 2xDDR400 for the P4 matches the fsb = 800 MHz,
> > this is the optimal situation.
> The P4 is not 800 fsb, it's 200
> It works something like the Athlon Xp, but does it twice.

Yes, yes but...

The P4/800 still matches dual channel memory 2xDDR400 optimally with a max
memory bandwidth of 6.4 GB/s. The AMD socket 754 doesn't.

Whether you then call it 800 fsb or 200 fsb is a matter of semantics. The
clock multiplier is indeed applied to 200 MHz, but dual channel DDR gives
you the 800 MHz data rate.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

>
> How utterly arrogant of you. I, like maggot, dislike VIA chipsets. I hold
> this opinion through several years experience of building quite a few
> computers, for myself, family, friends and friends of family/friends. I
have
> used chipsets from Intel, VIA, nVidia, SIS and Ali, probably more too. I
> *know* how to build a good system (I don't want them coming back with
> problems if I can aviod it) and one of the first rules of building a good
> system for performance is 'Don't use a VIA chipset board'.
>
> Oh sure, you can get them running stably and reliably if you know what
> you're doing but you won't get the full potential performance out of your
> CPU/peripherals.

(snip)

I dare to post facts rather than opinions, and that makes me arrogant
somehow? There are several chipset makers, and all of them (specifically
including VIA) have had the performance edge at various times until the
competition fired their next volley. To make a blanket statement like "
'one of the first rules of building a good system for performance is 'Don't
use a VIA chipset board' " is just plain stupid.

In fact, until the nforce3 250 went live, the VIA K8T800 was arguably the
best choice for Athlon64. Even now, the performance numbers between VIA,
SIS and nvidia are virtually identical, if you are building on the Athlon64
platform. That would make VIA a wise choice based on selection of
mainboards and price, though you'll find some good nforce3 250 boards
competitively priced, also.

If you are building a P4, the best value in chipsets at the moment would be
SIS, VIA and Intel in that order (though not too many boards use the SIS
655TX). While the three chipsets have performance numbers that are
virtually identical, each has its own price point and its own strengths and
weaknesses. If you want a good gaming system that won't cost an arm and a
leg, VIA PT880 is a good choice for the P4 at the moment. The Intel 875P
will offer virtually identical performance to the VIA PT880, but the 875P
also costs more. The 655TX is a little faster than VIA PT880, but the
selection of those boards is somewhat limited. All things considered, VIA
PT880 would be the best choice for many P4 builders, at the moment.

Note I said 'at the moment' as the technology is constantly changing. I
don't doubt that you benchmarked a celeron on a Intel BX board faster than a
similar VIA chipset board. AT THAT MOMENT, the Intel chipset was clearly
better. You are doing nobody any favors (least of all yourself) by
automatically dismissing any motherboard with a via chipset. Depending on
when you build, VIA might be the best choice. Yes, for performance,
lso. -Dave

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

> >You are now in my killfile.
>
> ROTFLMAO
>
> I expect I'll be joining Dave soon. I just hope my poxy AMD system
> (NF2) doesn't bomb out on me before I get to see the post. Of course
> that's assuming the AMD + VIA system on the other side of the desk
> doesn't blow up and kill everyone in the house first.
>
>
> Tim

Funny. -Dave

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

"Courseyauto" <courseyauto@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040731083233.04711.00000453@mb-m21.aol.com...
> JK wrote:
> >
> > The dual channel of the P4 is relatively slow though since the
> > memory controller is not on the chip. Look at the actual benchmarks
> > comparing the two. The article has benchmarks for both socket
> > 754 and socket 939 Athlon 64 chips.
> >
> > http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipse [...] i=2065&p=1
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------
>
> If you throw out the FX 55 which is not even available yet,the intel CPU's
show
> up quite a bit better in the benchmarks. DOUG

Sure, if the intel is running 3.6 GHz

I've read a lot of benchmarks, and on most of the.
Intel vs Fx53 Tests.

On most tests, the FX53 beats the normal P4 3.4 GHz
It also dosn't fail to keep up with the P4 EE.
When doing a Video encoding test, and I know these
tests to be right, cause I've had this thing up, and over 3.3 GHz from 2.6
Hands down, without a problem, the P4 beats the FX53
But on most cases, not by a lot.
The few daul channel 754's that are out there, use an Intel chip to run it.
My Asus A7N8X has Intel chips for it's dual channel memory.
But dual channel mode won't run if you put the memory in slots 1 & 2
It will if you put the ram in slots 1 & 3

Hm, ..
My FX 5200 Card.
The difference between my P4 running 3 GHz & my AMD XP 2200+
The 2200+ is running 2700+ @ 2.18 GHz (2.187) not far from 2.19
Sorry man, my point.
It's hard to say, when I put the 5200 in this system, I get very close
to the same marks on 3DMark 03 I would have to say 5 - 10 %
That's all I get between my two systems, it's really not worth the
Extra $$ just to get a P4

Denny.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

> If you throw out the FX 55 which is not even available yet,the intel CPU's
show
> up quite a bit better in the benchmarks. DOUG

Sure, if the intel is running 3.6 GHz

I've read a lot of benchmarks, and on most of the.
Intel vs Fx53 Tests.

On most tests, the FX53 beats the normal P4 3.4 GHz
It also dosn't fail to keep up with the P4 EE.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------

Are you looking at the same review i am? The Intel 3.4 EE beat the FX 53
940 and 939 pin in almost all the tests shown. The 940 FX is better than the
939 because of the bigger cache,the EE is better than the std P4 because of the
huge cache. But then again what can you believe that Anandtech says nowadys
anyway,using an AMD which is not even available,no tellin what Intel will have
when the FX 55 is available. Im not pro AMD or Intel,i have both.. DOUG

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 11:36:02 +0100, Steve Pearce
<*stevepearce@btinternet.com*> wrote:

>On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 17:45:04 GMT, MS
><matthews@mailsnare.---nojunktakeout---.net> wrote:
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>Having had such great replies about which processor to buy, now is my
>>chance to ask about which motherboard.
>>
>>I've decided to get a Pentium 4 3.0E Ghz 800Mhz Prescott CPU, but my
>>supplier (who will be doing the actual system build) has loads of P4
>>motherboards. I've narrowed it down to these 9.
>>
>
>I've used a Gigabyte GA-8IPE1000g with that processor with good
>results, the "pro" version should be just as good.



Gigabyte MoBo's do not let you overclock at all, or support faster Memory go
for a Abit..

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

<Woger MKII @wogerbox.co.nz> wrote in message
news:j98pg09s4re2beu1572i53gqda1udcb4kr@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 11:36:02 +0100, Steve Pearce
> <*stevepearce@btinternet.com*> wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 17:45:04 GMT, MS
> ><matthews@mailsnare.---nojunktakeout---.net> wrote:
> >
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>Having had such great replies about which processor to buy, now is my
> >>chance to ask about which motherboard.
> >>
> >>I've decided to get a Pentium 4 3.0E Ghz 800Mhz Prescott CPU, but my
> >>supplier (who will be doing the actual system build) has loads of P4
> >>motherboards. I've narrowed it down to these 9.
> >>
> >
> >I've used a Gigabyte GA-8IPE1000g with that processor with good
> >results, the "pro" version should be just as good.
>
>
>
> Gigabyte MoBo's do not let you overclock at all, or support faster Memory
go
> for a Abit..
>
>
Huh? I have an 8IG1000 Pro board, I've had it up to 3.36 GHz on water.
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/dstrausser33/

Denny. :-)

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

Woger, MKII, @wogerbox.co.nz wrote:
>

> >
> >I've used a Gigabyte GA-8IPE1000g with that processor with good
> >results, the "pro" version should be just as good.
>
> Gigabyte MoBo's do not let you overclock at all, or support faster Memory go
> for a Abit..

Gigabyte mobo comes with overclocking software 'EasyTune4' included and a
chapter on overclocking in the mobo manual. However, I only use the diagnostic
functions since I'm not an overclocker and don't recommend it. Unfortunately,
the software doesn't allow me to underclock.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt (More info?)

"~misfit~" <misfit61nz@yahoo-mung.co.nz> wrote in message
news:Uy1Pc.7734$N77.390567@news.xtra.co.nz...
> maggot wrote:
> >
> > I had an AMD761 chipset mb and the only flaky part on it was the VIA
> > USB controller.
>
> <snip>
>
> Hey! I got one of those on the shelf! GA-7DXE. Replaced it with an
> nForce2Ultra400.
> --
> ~misfit~
>
>

Don't talk to me about VIA USB controllers!


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.732 / Virus Database: 486 - Release Date: 29/07/2004