Move Over G45: Nvidia's nForce 730i Arrives

[FIFIFOFO]

In my opinion, the article did bad to AMD chipset/platform.
Currently, there are many 790GX+SB750 MBs less than $100. But, apparently, THG chose a much expensive one from ASUS.
As the result of cost balance, CPU 5400+, much cheaper than E7200, could only be chosen.
Apparently, Intel CPU is better than AMD one. So, we could see the Intel's system(E7200+G45/730i) did good in most of tests.
But, that makes little sense to chipset/platform

 

[Shadow703793]

Ok, people need to start realizing you could actually OC on that ASUS AMD board unlike some of the cheaper boards. At the end of the day, prices are quite smiler.

 

[FIFIFOFO]

But, it seems there is no OC test done here.
In addition, Intel's CPU seems better for OC.

 

[marraco]

If it is a capable PhysX accelerator, that would unload PhysX on discrete video cards, so it would be no choice out of nvidia (for gamers).

By the way, it need to have a RAID 0 benchmark. Up to date, intel chipsets have no competence in RAID performance (from nvidia, ATI, or many discrete raid controlers). Also, Intel allow to made simultaneously fast RAID 0 on first partition, and safe RAID 1 on second partition. Nvidia absolutely need to have that feature.

 

[KyleSTL]

Up to date, intel chipsets have no competence in RAID performance (from nvidia, ATI, or many discrete raid controlers).

For clarification he's saying Intel has no competition in RAID implementation. Having no competence in RAID is the opposite of the truth.

 

[jaybus]

I agree with some others. I doubt many would use an AMD 5400+ on the 790GX when a 6000+ can be had for only $12 more. Why not bump up from $220 to ~$235 and compare the 6000+ to the E7300? Personally, I would have liked to see how the 8450 would do, since it is only $20 more.

 

[KyleSTL]

89W 6000+, yes. 125W 6000+, no. I think the best choice would be the $77 5400+ BE, although an aftermarket cooler would be required, since the CPU does not come with one. Unlocked multiplier FTW!

 

[jaragon13]

[citation][nom]ryun[/nom]Good article but I feel compelled to say that I don't understand your choice for pitting the 790GX (~$140 board) and a 5400+ (~$80) with an the E7200 (~$120) and the G45 (~$100).Wouldn't it have made more sense to pair up similarly priced components, such as the 780g and 5400+ vs a E2180 and G45? Maybe someone could explain the reasoning?[/citation]
The G45 would of sucked ass either way.

 

[Guest]

I for one feel this is pure marketing hype. It was biased from the start to market the Nvidia product. This was not a motherboard comparison, but a cpu comparison.

This article was supposed to compare the capabilities of three motherboards. That can not be done useing processors with wildly differing capabilities.

All that we know from this comparison is that the Intel processor of choice is more capable than the less expensive Amd processor.

For a true motherboard comparison, the choice of all components other than the motherboards themselves would need to be kept as close as possible to the same capabilites.

Thanks

 

[cangelini]

[citation][nom]MountainMan[/nom]I for one feel this is pure marketing hype. It was biased from the start to market the Nvidia product. This was not a motherboard comparison, but a cpu comparison. This article was supposed to compare the capabilities of three motherboards. That can not be done useing processors with wildly differing capabilities. All that we know from this comparison is that the Intel processor of choice is more capable than the less expensive Amd processor.For a true motherboard comparison, the choice of all components other than the motherboards themselves would need to be kept as close as possible to the same capabilites. Thanks[/citation]

Valuable feedback, but now you're in the realm of ideals. If there were an AMD processor that featured Intel's features and an Intel processor that included all of AMD's features, there'd be no such thing as differentiation.

Call it marketing if you like, but a lot of effort goes in to setting up comparable configurations--and if price isn't the ultimate equalizer, please let us know what you think would work better.

 

[DaMountainMan]

Not in the realm of ideals at all. Rather in the realm of reality and common sense.

Toms hardware has benchmarks of both Intel and Amd prosessors that are readily available. To make an even evaluation of the motherboards and their onboard graphics capabilities and features, all that would be required as far as processors goes is to pick an Intel, and an Amd processor that are juse one rung above or below one another on the benchmarks comparison list. Surely you could have picked 2 comparitively priced processors from that list had you so chosen.

Had that been done, we would indeed have been graced with a true motherboard down graphics comparison.

Thanks.

 

[cangelini]

Ok, I understand better what you're suggesting, but I still don't agree. Consulting the charts, I randomly picked the DivX benchmark and found the AMD Phenom X4 9150e a couple of rungs underneath the E7200. So now we're talking about needing a $200 quad-core in order to compete against the $120 dual-core. I don't find anything wrong technically problematic with this approach since in theory it does normalize one benchmark, but surely you can see how going this route instead will lead to another contingent of folks crying foul? On top of that, you zip over to something like World in Conflict, and suddenly you need an X4 9950 in order to keep up, so the previous comparison becomes skewed.

FWIW, I appreciate the discussion on ways to improve the benchmark methodology. This method is not perfect either, though.

 

[DaMountainMan]

Not to be arguementative, however the current price of the Amd X% 9600 processor is $109 at Newegg. That is $10 below the E7200 as used in the article. Which would still allow the difference in price toward the disparity in motherboard prices.

The Phenom 9600 would compare favorably with the Intel cup used in the comparison. Being more capable in some benchmarks, and less capable in others.

That being said the the overall result would be that the two processors are more or less equally capable. That being the case I believe the use of such processors would give your audience a balanced motherboard graphics shootout.

As it stands, the review was extremely biased in favor of the Nvidia 9300 graphics chip, So much so that it did not allow the Amd graphics processor to display it's capabilities on even close to an even playing field.

Fair reviews can be done. Were equal $$$ the intent of your article, it should have been renamed to something on the order of "Econony onboard graphics combo's, best bang for the buck". Even then your choice of components would have needed more research.

Thanks again.

 

[cangelini]

I've rebuilt my AMD platform with a Phenom X4 9600 and will be updating this thread and the story's conclusion shortly.

 

[DaMountainMan]

I look forward to your balanced review. It is good to see constructive criticism recieved. (though I am admittedly blunt and some see me as abrasive, it is not intended thatway.) Your efforts I am sure reflect well on Tomshardware.

I am a real fan of this site, and though my post above may seem to point to a bias, I have no vested interest in seeing Amd do well or not. I just look for a balanced review that does not skew or bias the process.

Again, I look foward to your updated review. I expect that at least a few of the benchmarks will be changed in favor of the Amd. That is not to say that I do not believe the Nvdia 9300 is not a great product. I believe it as well as the 9400 will be great for low level gamers, and especially home theater pc enthuasiast.

I had not intended to respond again to this thread, but thought that in light of my criticism your efforts are laudable and deserve to be credited. We will see how the competitors fair soon I hope.

Thanks.

 

[cangelini]

Oooook, so. Interesting results. I've updated the conclusion page to reflect the scores (pardon the table). As you'd expect, some results go way in favor of AMD, others hurt AMD even more. I didn't run UT, Supreme Commander, or any of the synthetics--I find UT far too inconsistent in bot tests, Supreme Commander is a slide show anyway, and the synthetics are of little real-world value anyway. Hopefully, DMM, these are more what you were looking for. Have a good weekend, all.

 

[Joe_The_Dragon]

790gx and some 780g Ati boards have on board side port ram vs useing system ram with nvdiai and intel

 

[Joe_The_Dragon]

[citation][nom]Joe_The_Dragon[/nom]790gx and some 780g Ati boards have on board side port ram vs useing system ram with nvidia and intel[/citation]

 

[DaMountainMan]

Thanks for the updated review. The results are eye opening, but not unexpected.

I will agree that the match up between a quad core and dual core do not directly correlate one to the other since many of the apps. are not optimized for multi threading.

Perhaps an Amd 6400 X2 would have been a better matchup, but alas it is not as fast as the E7200 from Intel.

The updated results did show as I suspected that the board with Amd onboard is every bit as much a gamer as the board with Nvidia chip.

While the updated results are not the ideal, they at least are starting on somewhat equal footing, and are realistic.

Thanks

 

[cangelini]

Very welcome MountainMan, hope you had a great weekend.

 

[Narg]

With the pathetic drivers for 64-bit on their motherboards, I've no interest in nVidia what-so-ever.

 

[bgregorcy]

when are these boards going to be released?

 

[rusabus]

I know that most users won't run a RAID5 setup on this board, but I am curious to see what kind of RAID5 performance this board can deliver. I currently have a P35/ICH9R board that delivers excellent RAID5 read and write performance. My parts bin currently has an E6600 and 5 160GB Seagate SATA drives that I would love to throw onto a board like this, but RAID performance will be the deciding factor between an ICH9R/ICH10R and the GeForce 9300/9400.

Are you planning on writing a more comprehensive review that would include RAID benchmarks?

Thanks!

 

[Guest]

Anyone knows if the board supports multi-display on 2 digital ports (DVI+HDMI)?

Thanks!

 

[Guest]

don't u think i will use phenom x3 rather than ax2 to utilise HT3. for sake of keeping price same i will use 780g rather than 790,offcouse i wil do.790gx don't make sence, i wil go for better value 780g. it simply looks to me that comparison is been conducted with setup to intensionaly show geforce as better choice, if competion was to be fair choose best possible . so that comparision looks vague