WTF is this crap! 875 vs 865PE analyzed!

xxsk8er101xx · May 30, 2003

I think we have been had!

i'm gonna quote Intel saying that there is no such thing as PAT and then i'll continue.

"it's [PAT] not a technology at all - it just means Intel is using better silicon for the memory controller hub chips".

Now i'm reading off intel's webpage. read this it's bullchit!

"The Intel 875P chipset features support for an 800mhz front side bus (FSB) and implements intel Performance Acceleration Technology (PAT) with dual-channel DDR 400 memory configurations..."

*blinks* but guys - it's not a technology ok! we just call it
Performance Acceleration Technology for chitz and giggles.

Here is the only difference 875 has:
1) PAT
2) Supports ECC Memory
3) 875 is packaged in 1005 FCBGA while the 865PE has 932 FCBGA

Seeing that PAT isn't real the only difference then would be the support for ECC memory and that the 875 is a bigger chip.

Sounds like a joke!

In conclusion the 875 and the 865 are EXACTLY the same! Not many people use ECC memory and PAT isn't real and who cares about the larger chipset size.

"Bread makes me poop!" - Special Ed

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?id=9933" target="_new"> My Rig </A>

phial · May 30, 2003

its marketing baby!!!

the whole computer industry is based on false labels and lies. im getting sick of it personally....

"ATI has a new card!! its called the 9959pro!! based on teh RVSV560 chip! but its really a radeon 8500 with half the pixel pipelines!! hence the better name!!"

-------

<A HREF="http://www.quake3world.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001355.html" target="_new">*I hate thug gangstas*</A>

eden · May 30, 2003

And to think people were still considering the extra supposed 5% for 20-50 more.

--
If I could see the Matrix, I'd tell you I am only seeing 0s inside your head! :tongue:

slvr_phoenix · May 30, 2003

I hate to have to be the one to point out the obvious but the 875 is intended for workstation use with ECC RAM and the 865 is intended for all of us SOHO junkies.

Generally, the 3rd party manus are pairing the 865 with all sorts of other 3rd party chips to save every last penny on their SOHO offerings. Meanwhile most of the 875s are being set up how Intel wants them, as workstation boards. So the point of getting the 875 is not for 'PAT', but for the other features such as ECC RAM and gigabit CSA LAN.

Really, only fifty bucks more for a workstation board is pretty good. And anyone upset by the fact that 'PAT' is just a slightly reduced latency binning on the northbridge needs to have their head examined.

<pre>There are 10 types of people in this world: those who can understand binary and those who can't.</pre>

sonoran · May 30, 2003

(Somewhat) related article over at Lost Circuits: <A HREF="http://www.lostcircuits.com/motherboard/canterwood2/" target="_new">http://www.lostcircuits.com/motherboard/canterwood2/</A>.

xxsk8er101xx · May 30, 2003

i think it's more about the lie then anything else

"Bread makes me poop!" - Special Ed

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?id=9933" target="_new"> My Rig </A>

slvr_phoenix · May 30, 2003

i think it's more about the lie then anything else

What lie? That Performance Acceleration Technology has been re-designated from the technology that allows the MCH to use lower latency paths when running an 800MHz FSB and 400MHz RAM to a term to signify the binning of the fastest northbridges as 875s so that this above-mentioned and now unnamed technology is guaranteed to work for all 875 mobos, but not for all 865 mobos?

The 875 chipset still very much incorporates a technology for the MCH to shortcut the memory paths for a lower latency.

So, what, you're mad that the 865 has this technology too, but just that it sometimes is and sometimes isn't turned on, depending on the manufacturer's preferences and if the chip is actually of a high enough quality to support it?

Or you're just upset by Intel not being sure if it is this technology which is named 'PAT' or if it is just the binning that is named 'PAT' or if it is the combination of the two which is named 'PAT'?

Either way, I'm not sure just what 'lie' we're supposed to be upset over because either way the 875 has the MCH's latency reducing path technology that was originally referred to as 'PAT'.

I guess we're just supposed to be upset that some of the 865s have it too? Damn Intel for giving us improved technology that they didn't initially advertise. Damn them!

???

Sorry, I just don't get it.

Or maybe you're upset that Intel made it widely known that they were going to release the 865 chipset shortly after they released the 875 chipset and that they would be virtually identical except for ECC support and 'PAT', and therefore have virtually identical performance. Damn Intel for making it incredibly obvious that they would be releasing a lower-cost SOHO 865 version not long after the 875's release date! Damn you Intel for telling me that I could have just waited for a SOHO version that costs less but made me buy the more expensive 875 with identical performance because I couldn't possibly just wait a couple of weeks longer! Damn you Intel!

???

Sorry, I just don't that either.

So pray tell xxsk8er101xx, if it wasn't either of those nonsensical problems with Intel then what pray tell is your reason for being so upset over such a trivial matter?

<pre>There are 10 types of people in this world: those who can understand binary and those who can't.</pre>

xxsk8er101xx · May 30, 2003

intel said it's (PAT) not a technology and isn't real. did you not read the article on what Intel said? Thats all it is is better silicon. But they use marketing and call it PAT for people to buy their boards.

you soo don't get it do you.

"Bread makes me poop!" - Special Ed

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?id=9933" target="_new"> My Rig </A>

simwiz2 · May 30, 2003

It is not lying as long as there is some performance gain from the technique/technology/silicon.

slvr_phoenix · May 30, 2003

intel said it's (PAT) not a technology and isn't real. did you not read the article on what Intel said? Thats all it is is better silicon. But they use marketing and call it PAT for people to buy their boards.

Intel said that 'PAT' is just better silicon, sure. But if you do even a tiny little bit of research, you'll find that the latency reduction technology that Intel used to call 'PAT' still there. I guess it just isn't called 'PAT' anymore. It's now some nameless latency-improving entity. So who cares what Intel calls what so long as the actual technology in the thing hasn't changed? That's what I don't get. It's such a trivial matter to get concerned over if you ask me. The technology is still there, it's just not called 'PAT' anymore. Whoop-dee-doo.

And actually, if you read the datasheet for the i875 chipset, that mystical-magical latency-reducing technology without a name is still called 'PAT' anyway.

So the feeling that I really get out of it is just that the big-wigs at Intel are just proving that management knows $#!7 all compared to the engineers. The technology is real and is there. You just have one bloody moron at Intel who is confused. So again, what's the big upset?

<pre>There are 10 types of people in this world: those who can understand binary and those who can't.</pre>

eden · May 31, 2003

Well, not only we have bloody morons in this forum, but we have one at Intel. Man, what a day for you Slvr, finding bloody morons one after the other! :tongue:

--
If I could see the Matrix, I'd tell you I am only seeing 0s inside your head! :tongue:

lumper · May 31, 2003

i think the problem lies mainly with people who spent the $250 + for an 875mobo only to see that a while later you can get a $120 mobo 865 and achieve about the same performance in games and benchmarks.

having not ever bought an intel product i was very happy to see the 865 cost vs performance with ht and 800 fsb.

i was going to build a canterwood because i assumed it was the fastest available chipset i could build with, im glad it was so expensive i had to wait.

eden · May 31, 2003

It's a good thing users like you exist. Suspicion is a must nowadays in the PC industry. Yet another low the industry has sunk to.

--
If I could see the Matrix, I'd tell you I am only seeing 0s inside your head! :tongue:

Steven21 · Jun 1, 2003

Im guessing thats a Ploy by Hardware manufacures, they release there more expensive product lines before they release there least expensive lines to get people to buy the more expensive ones. I forget how long i waited for the GF 4200's to finaly be released.

"The Needs Of The Many Outweigh The Needs Of The Few, Or The One"
-Spock

VelocityPimp · Jun 1, 2003

gigabit ethernet through the csa is available on the 865 chipset

the 865 is just what they use to provide more variety, hence the 3 versions (P, PE, G)

eden · Jun 1, 2003

I just don't see the 875 as a need for a higher model number. i850E was indeed higher than 845, but it boasted degrees higher performance, was put as the High-end chipset by Intel, and a workstation one. Canterwood claims it's the top banana when it isn't really, and is a workstation. I just don't see its place as relevant as 850 was to 845.

I even have a hard time explaining what I wanna say about this.

--
If I could see the Matrix, I'd tell you I am only seeing 0s inside your head! :tongue:

slvr_phoenix · Jun 2, 2003

i think the problem lies mainly with people who spent the $250 + for an 875mobo only to see that a while later you can get a $120 mobo 865 and achieve about the same performance in games and benchmarks.

But it was pretty common knowledge that the 865 was coming out shortly after the 875. Intel made it widely known. It certainly wasn't any industry secret. So anyone who had that 'problem' deserves their fate for not having done any research whatsoever before their purchase.

<pre>There are 10 types of people in this world: those who can understand binary and those who can't.</pre>

slvr_phoenix · Jun 2, 2003

gigabit ethernet through the csa is available on the 865 chipset

In theory, yes. In practice, show me even five 865 motherboards that have it. Heck, most of the 865 motherboards don't even have gigabit ethernet.

<pre>There are 10 types of people in this world: those who can understand binary and those who can't.</pre>

lumper · Jun 3, 2003

you said :
"But it was pretty common knowledge that the 865 was coming out shortly after the 875. Intel made it widely known. It certainly wasn't any industry secret. So anyone who had that 'problem' deserves their fate for not having done any research whatsoever before their purchase."

yeah lol i agree, i always begin re-educating myself about a month before an upgrade to see what is hot and what is coming next, etc...
i havent upgraded since the 1800+ was a month old, after an upgrade i tend to not pay attention to new stuff for at least a year, by the time i go to upgrade the different things that have come out are astounding.

i started looking at the nforce2 , never even thought of pentiums, then i read the article on the canterwod chipset and thought hmmm, then i priced it and thought argg, ill go with an nforce2.
then a few days later i read about the springdale when they tested it with the 3.0 800 fsb chip.

it was then i decided i would spend a week or two looking closely at this setup.
i ordered it yesterday. heeee heee.

my wife thinks im nuts because i dedicate around 5 hours a day or so for 3 to 5 weeks to looking up parts, reading articles, looking at benchmarks, going to support forums to see what the skinny realy is,etc... lol but i say hey, i want to be happy when i upgrade, so knowing what to expect before you buy is always the smart thing to.
i would be mad if i hadnt looked and just ordeed the canterwood chip and board.
sorta like having the choic between the 1700+ and the 1800+ had i know about the clockability and lower voltage setting i would have opted for the 1700+ but alas i didnt do the homework and have been stuck with a chip that will not overclock much at all regardless of memory and cooling.
never again.

eden · Jun 3, 2003

Slvr, Intel's roadmap and past reports made it out loud advertising that Canterwood WILL be a very superior performing chipset over the 865, as in being the new high-end chipset.

Anandtech who was reporting last year's Comdex showed a chart with Intel's claims. <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1752&p=2" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1752&p=2</A>

I don't say it's a lie at the moment, but it's also not as realistic as we thought. This Turbo mode, who says it's always apparent?
Yes Anandtech has benched it, but they used some of the cheapest performers, the Abit mainboards. They were already at the bottom of the heap initially. I wish they would try Asus' offerings, as THG did, as the latter's 2 mainboards had been tied as we have seen.
THEN you could see why we've been hyped and possibly lied to. (not just the performance expected but the misleading thought this was a high-end chipset like the i850E was to the i845)

--
If I could see the Matrix, I'd tell you I am only seeing 0s inside your head! :tongue:

eden · Jun 3, 2003

In theory, yes. In practice, show me even five 865 motherboards that have it. Heck, most of the 865 motherboards don't even have gigabit ethernet.

Um if a chipset integrates a feature to it, shouldn't the mainboard be necessarily supporting it?

--
If I could see the Matrix, I'd tell you I am only seeing 0s inside your head! :tongue:

Guest · Jun 3, 2003

slvr_phoenix · Jun 3, 2003

Slvr, Intel's roadmap and past reports made it out loud advertising that Canterwood WILL be a very superior performing chipset over the 865, as in being the new high-end chipset.

No, Intel's roadmap and past reports stated that Canterwood would have some sort of speed-boosting technology that Springdale doesn't have. That's it. All of the hype that Canterwood would be so spectacularly better was supposition that came from the tech sites.

Try actually reading the URL that you posted. Did Intel say "but apparently Canterwood's "turbo mode" means that it is highly optimized for DDR400 performance and should yield noticeably higher performance than Springdale-PE" or did AnandTech say it?

Eden, you can't blame Intel for the over-hyping that the media did. Intel made no grand claims. People just assumed it would be some incredible performance booster. And frankly, anyone who thought that it would even boost performance all that much after actually having read about the MCH's latency reducing path needs their head examined. It would be at absolute best like running your RAM at 2-2-2-5 instead of 2-2-2-6. <sarcasm>Ooh. Yippe!</sarcasm>

The only people who could possibly be upset about this are the ones who never researched it in the first place, and beleive me, it was pretty easy research to do.

THEN you could see why we've been hyped and possibly lied to.

I'll agree that we have been hyped to and lied to, but not by Intel. The lying and over-hyping has been done by tech sites like AnandTech and by people in forums.

"Yeah, if you treat them like equals, it'll only encourage them to think they ARE your equals." - Thief from <A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/daily.php?date=030603" target="_new">8-Bit Theater</A>

slvr_phoenix · Jun 3, 2003

Um if a chipset integrates a feature to it, shouldn't the mainboard be necessarily supporting it?

If I give you a gun do you have to blow my brains out with it? Just because the potential is there does not mean that it actually happens.

Do the research, Eden. If, as you say, just because the northbridge supports gigabit ethernet with CSA, then all 865PE motherboards should have gigabit ethernet with CSA. Let's look at the selection available...

<A HREF="http://www.msicomputer.com/product/detail_spec/product_detail.asp?model=865PE_Neo2-S" target="_new">MSI 865PE Neo2-S</A> has no LAN at all.
<A HREF="http://www.msicomputer.com/product/detail_spec/product_detail.asp?model=865PE_Neo2-LS" target="_new">MSI 865PE Neo2-LS</A>has a 10/100 LAN with CSA?! Talk about a weird choice.
<A HREF="http://www.msicomputer.com/product/detail_spec/product_detail.asp?model=865PE_Neo2-FIS2R" target="_new">MSI 865PE Neo2-FIS2R</A>is our first board with gigabit CSA ethernet!
<A HREF="http://www.abit-usa.com/products/mb/techspec.php?categories=1&model=79" target="_new">Abit IS7</A> has only 10/100.
<A HREF="http://www.abit-usa.com/products/mb/techspec.php?categories=1&model=80" target="_new">Abit IS7-E</A> has only 10/100.
<A HREF="http://www.abit-usa.com/products/mb/techspec.php?categories=1&model=81" target="_new">Abit IS7-G</A> actually does have a gigabit LAN, but it's through the PCI bus and doesn't support CSA.
<A HREF="http://www.dfi.com.tw/Product/xx_product_spec_details_r_us.jsp?PRODUCT_ID=1681&CATEGORY_TYPE=MB" target="_new">DFI 865PE-ALE</A> has only 10/100.
<A HREF="http://www.dfi.com.tw/Product/xx_product_spec_details_r_us.jsp?PRODUCT_ID=1493&CATEGORY_TYPE=null" target="_new">DFI PS83-BL</A> has only 10/100.
<A HREF="http://www.giga-byte.com/MotherBoard/Products/Products_Spec_GA-8IPE1000.htm[/url" target="_new">Gigabyte GA-8IPE1000</A>Doesn't even have ethernet.
<A HREF="http://www.giga-byte.com/Motherboard/Products/Products_GA-8IPE1000MT.htm" target="_new">Gigabyte GA-8IPE1000MT</A> has only 10/100.
<A HREF="http://www.giga-byte.com/MotherBoard/Products/Products_GA-8IPE1000MK.htm" target="_new">Gigabyte GA-8IPE1000MK</A> has only 10/100.
<A HREF="http://www.giga-byte.com/MotherBoard/Products/Products_GA-8PENXP.htm[/url" target="_new">Gigabyte GA-8PENXP</A>The second board with gigabit CSA ethernet through the northbridge!
<A HREF="http://www.albatron.com.tw/english/it/mb/specification.asp?pro_id=53" target="_new">Albatron PX865PE</A> has no ethernet.
<A HREF="http://www.albatron.com.tw/english/it/mb/specification.asp?pro_id=52" target="_new">Albatron PX865PE PRO</A> has only 10/100.
<A HREF="http://www.albatron.com.tw/english/it/mb/specification.asp?pro_id=51" target="_new">Albatron PX865PE Pro II</A> is our third board with gigabit CSA LAN through the northbridge!
<A HREF="http://www.aopen.com/products/mb/AX4SPE.htm" target="_new">AOpen AX4SPE</A> has no ethernet.
<A HREF="http://www.aopen.com/products/mb/AX4SPE-N.htm" target="_new">AOpen AX4SPE-N</A> has only 10/100.
<A HREF="http://www.aopen.com/products/mb/AX4SPE-L.htm" target="_new">AOpen AX4SPE-L</A> has gigabit ethernet, but through the PCI bus, so no CSA.
<A HREF="http://www.aopen.com/products/mb/AX4SPEMax.htm" target="_new">AOpen AX4SPE Max</A> has gigabit ethernet, but through the PCI bus, so no CSA.
<A HREF="http://usa.asus.com/prog/spec.asp?m=P4P800&langs=09" target="_new">ASUS P4P800</A> has gigabit ethernet, but through the PCI bus, so no CSA.
<A HREF="http://usa.asus.com/prog/spec.asp?m=P4P800 Deluxe&langs=09" target="_new">ASUS P4P800 Deluxe</A> has gigabit ethernet, but through the PCI bus, so no CSA.
<A HREF="http://www.iwillusa.com/products/ProductDetail.asp?vID=173&CID=94" target="_new">Iwill P4SE</A> has only 10/100.
<A HREF="http://www.iwillusa.com/products/ProductDetail.asp?vID=174&CID=94" target="_new">Iwill P4SE-GOLD</A> is our fourth motherboard with a gigabit CSA ethernet! Not only that, but it also has a second ethernet that's a 10/100. Sweet.
<A HREF="http://www.supermicro.com/PRODUCT/MotherBoards/865/P4SPE.htm" target="_new">Supermicro SUPER P4SPE</A> has only 10/100.
<A HREF="http://www.chaintech.com.tw/tw/eng/product_spec.asp?MPSNo=13&PISNo=159" target="_new">Chaintech 9PJL APOGEE</A> has some sort of LAN, but gives no details at all.

So in total we have a whole four 3rd-party motherboards that have gigabit ethernet with CSA. There are an additional five boards with gigabit ethernet that don't support CSA. Out of twenty-five boards, that's pretty sad. That means that only 16% of the 3rd-party 865PE motherboards actually fully utilize the northbridge's gigabit CSA ethernet.

"Yeah, if you treat them like equals, it'll only encourage them to think they ARE your equals." - Thief from <A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/daily.php?date=030603" target="_new">8-Bit Theater</A>

eden · Jun 4, 2003

Slvr, thanks for the research, I respect and am convinced now by your arguments and proof.

I guess yes, GB LAN is more Canterwood's friend. Now the other question is, what sane user actually thinks he can get 125MB/sec on his line at home?

I'll tell you who!

I don't know who... actually... it'll take 500 full moons before we do.

--
If I could see the Matrix, I'd tell you I am only seeing 0s inside your head! :tongue:

WTF is this crap! 875 vs 865PE analyzed!

Splendid

Splendid

Champion

Splendid

Distinguished

Splendid

Splendid

Splendid

Distinguished

Splendid

Champion

Distinguished

Champion

Distinguished

Distinguished

Champion

Splendid

Splendid

Distinguished

Champion

Champion

Guest

Guest

Splendid

Splendid

Champion

Share this page