*** Official Gigabyte 8KNXP/Ultra (875P) Thread ***

[Clauzii]

SCSI HDs usually performs much better than IDE-drives - but YES it DOES NOT MATTER TO HAVE THE FASTEST INTERFACE AVAILABLE UNLESS U HAVE A HardDrive that IS NOT INVENTED YET - Stupido!!!

 

[jaeger66]

Originally posted by: Clauzii
SCSI HDs usually performs much better than IDE-drives - but YES it DOES NOT MATTER TO HAVE THE FASTEST INTERFACE AVAILABLE UNLESS U HAVE A HardDrive that IS NOT INVENTED YET - Stupido!!!

Thank you!

 

[Paradoxx]

Originally posted by: jaeger66

Originally posted by: pr497

btw...this chipset does support ddr400 operation so you were actually wrong and right at the same time.

It only supports DDR400 @ 800(200x4)fsb.

I am confused, does this mean that DDR400 won't run at all without an 800fsb processor, what do you mean by "supports"?

Where can I find a suggested memoery list for the GA-8KNXP.

 

[jaeger66]

Originally posted by: Paradoxx


I am confused, does this mean that DDR400 won't run at all without an 800fsb processor, what do you mean by "supports"?

Where can I find a suggested memoery list for the GA-8KNXP.

No, it just means that if you use a 533fsb CPU your RAM will run at PC2700(DDR333) speeds. PC3200(DDR400) will work fine, just at the lower speed. I'm not aware of any list of memory yet though.

 

[smahoney]

One of the interesting point on the "Ultra" version of the board is that the onboard SCSI controller supports limited RAID capability - hence the really increased premium - although it drops the 1394 ports and IDE RAID controller on the non-Ultra board. Gigabyte seems to really be pushing for the workstation market with this board. Hard to imagine anyone getting this board unless they have to use 15K RPM SCSI drives.

I wonder if their next "Ultra" board will support Fibre Channel.....

 

[Wurrmm]

Originally posted by: smahoney
One of the interesting point on the "Ultra" version of the board is that the onboard SCSI controller supports limited RAID capability - hence the really increased premium - although it drops the 1394 ports and IDE RAID controller on the non-Ultra board. Gigabyte seems to really be pushing for the workstation market with this board. Hard to imagine anyone getting this board unless they have to use 15K RPM SCSI drives.

I wonder if their next "Ultra" board will support Fibre Channel.....

The non-ultra has firewire and IDE raid just no SCSI. The Ultra has SCSI but no firewire.

 

[Tom]

I'm surprised there doesn't seem to be much discussion of the 8IK1100 , at least compared to the buzz about the Abit IC7.

At the moment both of these boards are selling for $150 or so, other than the 8IK1100 having a 10/100 LAN and some weird number of ram slots, I don't see much difference between them, feature-wise.

Of course the devil is in the details, like specific memory ratios, vcore settings, etc. Anyone have any thoughts about how the Gigabyte 8IK1100 and the Abit IC7 compare ?

 

[oldfart]

From what I understand, Gigabyte has the same issue as Asus with the 875 boards. If you have a 533 MHz FSB CPU, you can not run it between 166 and 199 FSB.

 

[techietam]

Originally posted by: jaeger66

Originally posted by: Paradoxx


I am confused, does this mean that DDR400 won't run at all without an 800fsb processor, what do you mean by "supports"?

Where can I find a suggested memoery list for the GA-8KNXP.

No, it just means that if you use a 533fsb CPU your RAM will run at PC2700(DDR333) speeds. PC3200(DDR400) will work fine, just at the lower speed. I'm not aware of any list of memory yet though.

That is kind of funny... I wonder why 875P doesn't allow you to run memory @ 400 using 533FSB CPU.
On AT Mainbord page there is a review of Gigabyte's SiS chipset board and it does show higher results
with 400 memory over 333 or 266 running 3.06 P4, which is 533... I am actually thinking to get that
board, it would be the first time in my life to have SiS chipset

BTW, as far as SCSI interface/drives go... If you have a drive with 8MB cache, then it might transfer
data a little bit faster over 320 interface. Of course it won't matter when it reads data from platters
but, I think cashe can easily transfer data at 320MB/s. Although, it wouldn't be noticible, of course,
since 99.9999999% of the time it has to read from platters and 45MB/s isn't even close to 160, let
alone 320

 

[OberstWittmann]

i just received my 8knxp, i am not going to set it up until i get my 3.0 ghz cpu. I will keep everyone informed on how it goes

 

[Wurrmm]

Originally posted by: OberstWittmann
i just received my 8knxp, i am not going to set it up until i get my 3.0 ghz cpu. I will keep everyone informed on how it goes

Nice....I should have mine soon also. Then all I have to do is wait a week or so for the 2.8ghz CPU.

 

[harddrive747]

Kewl. I'm waiting a couple of weeks to see if the price comes down. I got all the other parts, including the 2.8 GHz processor, 1 gig of ram in 2 DIMMS and a few other goodies.

I can and can't wait.

I will let you guys know when I get it and how it goes.

Terry

 

[Willy9Boy]

I was looking at the Abit IC7-G, but with the bios problems, I am considering the 8KNXP (non ultra).
Has anyone compared the two and has anyone had the memory timing issues mentioned
with the Abit problem? I am also interested in knowing how high the 8KNXP has been overclocked
using an 800 chip and also what memory is everyone using?

 

[nucleon]

This board looks nice, but I have one question.

In the doco, the block diagram reports that the network port is connected to the southbridge, i.e the ICH chip. But I thought that the 'CSA' bus was connected to the Northbridge. The northbridge conenction was by design to alleviate the northbridge-southbridge interconnect.

The Feature summary in the manual reports that the Onboard LAN is "Intel 82547EI (KENAI II CSA) Chipset". So from that it sounds that the onboard LAN is connected via CSA. Can anyone confirm? I know it would be abig Fubar for gigabyte to implement the intel gigabit LAN, and then connect in a non-optimal configuration.

As the CSA connectivity is a major marketting point from intel's point of view for the 875 chipset (the other was of course the 800MHz FSB), has anyone seen any reviews comparing network performance of this chipet, to say the E7205/845 chipsets?

The only other 875chipset board I've seen that claims a CSA connection for their onbaord LAN was the Abit motherboard (IC7-G).

-- Craig

 

[jaeger66]

Originally posted by: nucleon
This board looks nice, but I have one question.

In the doco, the block diagram reports that the network port is connected to the southbridge, i.e the ICH chip. But I thought that the 'CSA' bus was connected to the Northbridge. The northbridge conenction was by design to alleviate the northbridge-southbridge interconnect.

The Feature summary in the manual reports that the Onboard LAN is "Intel 82547EI (KENAI II CSA) Chipset". So from that it sounds that the onboard LAN is connected via CSA. Can anyone confirm? I know it would be abig Fubar for gigabyte to implement the intel gigabit LAN, and then connect in a non-optimal configuration.

As the CSA connectivity is a major marketting point from intel's point of view for the 875 chipset (the other was of course the 800MHz FSB), has anyone seen any reviews comparing network performance of this chipet, to say the E7205/845 chipsets?

The only other 875chipset board I've seen that claims a CSA connection for their onbaord LAN was the Abit motherboard (IC7-G).

-- Craig

http://www.anandtech.com/chipsets/showdoc.html?i=1811&p=5

http://www.intel.com/network/connectivity/go/gig_platforms/index.htm?iid=Homepage+SpotBot_text_030407&

 

[nucleon]

Originally posted by: Bobbyeyes
i REALLY dont have the faintest..
i even thought this thread was about the potentially fantastic
GIGABYTE GA-8KNXP board.

when i buy this board i will give a detailed (thugs format) thread.. including ide vs scsi performance, and overclocking and memory performance results.
so jaeger66...
i might just have to hold on to my scsi drives just a little longer!

Bobbyeyes - hehe I feel sorry for you. There have been various debates online since the dawn of the internet that have brought techie against techie. The major one that keeps coming up, time after time, is ide vs scsi. The arguements haven't changed, just the usernames that debate them. Unlucky for you that, the scsi camp is always outnumbered.

Remember guys, there are two components to measuring speed in computer systems. Much like Cars - cars are measured by top speed and acceleration. Computer systems connection is measured by bandwidth and latency. The max Bandwith of a connection, is always the min bandwidth of a single component in the system. As everyone has been corectly identifying, it's the transfer between the platters and controller that's the defining measurement for bandwidth.

As for latency, it's the sum of latency of the individual components. The differences between IDE and SCSI are too numerous to mention in a single post. But it's this area where the two are seperated in terms of cost and performance. One component that people have mentioned is the connection between the controller and the drive - 320MB vs 133MB (PATA) vs 150(SATA). The scsi interface has the better latency in this connection. But from there is where it gets complicated

-- Craig

 

[Wurrmm]

Originally posted by: harddrive747
Kewl. I'm waiting a couple of weeks to see if the price comes down. I got all the other parts, including the 2.8 GHz processor, 1 gig of ram in 2 DIMMS and a few other goodies.

I can and can't wait.

I will let you guys know when I get it and how it goes.

Terry

Is your 2.8 GHz and 800FSB, and if it is where did you get and how much did you pay?? I saw some on price watch and they are like 350 which is insane. They should only be around 278-320.

 

[jaeger66]

Originally posted by: Wurrmm
They should only be around 278-320.

Why?

 

[Wurrmm]

I saw it on a price list somewhere for this month. And the 3.0 800FSB was list at like 417

 

[jaeger66]

Originally posted by: Wurrmm
I saw it on a price list somewhere for this month. And the 3.0 800FSB was list at like 417

The 800fsb chips besides the 3.0 are not supposed to be out yet. So any Intel price list is meaningless until the official launch date.

 

[harddrive747]

My 2.8 GHZ is a 533 FSB.

I have been looking around and there are some places that have 3.0 GHZ, 800 FSB chips at $439 on the low side and $784 on the high.

There are a couple of places that report that they have a 2.8 GHZ, 800 FSB, between $351 and $498. I'm not totally convienced that the 2.8 is a 800 FSB when Intel's web site doesn't even show a 2.8 GHZ with an 800 FSB chip.

I got a laundry list of people who have these chips, so if you want them, I can post them tomorrow

See ya.

 

[Paradoxx]

The GA-8KNXP is currently listed on newegg for $250 anyone think it will go any lower between now and the release of the 800fsb P4's? Or should I go ahead and buy now.

Also let me weight in on the scsi vs. ide debate, I don't know much about it but I do know that when an argument is as close as scsi vs. ide I always go with the one that will cost me half as much. The only real reason I see for going with scsi is for the ability to hot plug, that must be nice, if you need that kind of thing.

 

[Wurrmm]

They are high right now casue the Springdales are really out yet. When the sprigdales become more mainstream, the Canterwoods will drop. The price drop should be aroud May 11 or 21 depending on the official release of the lower speed CPUs.

 

[snidy1]

What does the Ultra have that the non Ultra doesn't?

 

[Paradoxx]

Originally posted by: snidy1
What does the Ultra have that the non Ultra doesn't?

Ohh I know, I know, the Ultra has SCSI but does not have firewire. The non ultra has firewire but no SCSI.