Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (
More info?)
Thanks for the very informative reply.
Peter
"aq" <awalk@liverpool.com> wrote in message
news:cpdv44$2ki$1@newsflood.tokyo.att.ne.jp...
>
> "Paul" <nospam@needed.com> wrote in message
> news:nospam-1012042226080001@192.168.1.177...
> > In article <cpdhh6$84n$1@titan.btinternet.com>, "grylion"
> > <grylion@btinternet.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > > What is the difference between the P4C800-E Deluxe and the P4C800
> Deluxe.
> > > Thanks Peter
> >
> > The 875 Northbridge has two 266MB/sec busses on it. The 865 has only
> > one 266MB/sec bus. When the original P4P800 and P4C800 came out,
> > they each only used one 266MB/sec bus. The second bus on the P4C800
> > wasn't connected.
> >
> > When a Gigabit Ethernet chip sits on the PCI bus, it is limited to
> > the bandwidth of the PCI bus. That would only be an issue if you
> > were constructing a departmental server, as disks and Ethernet
> > could both be using the bandwidth of that bus at the same time.
> >
> > After there were complaints that Asus wasn't taking advantage of
> > the second 266MB/sec bus, Asus came out with the P4C800-E. That
> > board connects an Intel Gigabit Ethernet chip to the second
> > 266MB/sec bus. That allows Southbridge mounted disks and the
> > Ethernet to be used simultaneously, with less impact on one
> > another, than there would be on a P4C800.
> >
> > In a typical desktop application, I doubt you could see the
> > difference between the boards. For example, I found a paper
> > a few days ago, that said Win2k could transfer about 300Mbits/sec
> > with its TCP/IP stack. I did a less than optimal test on my
> > two gigabit equipped computers (one machine a P4C800-E,
> > connected directly to a A7N8X-E, and the A7N8X-E had
> > ICS enabled), and in an FTP transfer, the best I could get is
> > 46MB/sec transfer rate (using RAM disks at either end of the
> > transfer). That is well shy of a full Gigabit rate. How well
> > that works will depend on the OS used. The 46MB/sec rate, could
> > have been handled by the P4C800 just as easily as with a P4C800-E.
> >
> > HTH,
> > Paul
>
>
> Not sure about what Paul said, partly because I do not have enough
> technical knowledge.
>
> I bought a used P4C800, no E, no Delux; it is quite simple but the POST
> screen
> comes very slowly. It also has trouble to recognize some LAN card.
>
> The P4C800-E Delux is much faster in response, POST, and very stable.
> For ordinary user, perhaps P4P800 Delux is best in terms of cost and
> eprformance.
>
>
>
>
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram