An ECS motherboard that can take either a P4 S775 or an Athlon 64 S939!

Yousuf Khan

HEXUS.net : Review : CEBIT 2005: AMD or Intel? Same Motherboard! : Page
- 1/1
http://www.hexus.net/content/reviews...lld19JRD0xMDM2

Yousuf Khan wrote:
> An ECS motherboard that can take either a P4 S775 or an Athlon 64 S939!
>
> Yousuf Khan
>
> HEXUS.net : Review : CEBIT 2005: AMD or Intel? Same Motherboard! : Page
> - 1/1
> http://www.hexus.net/content/reviews...lld19JRD0xMDM2

That kind of thing is rarely cost-effective or optimal w.r.t. performance.

--
The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to
minimize spam. Our true address is of the form che...@prodigy.net.

"CJT" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...

> That kind of thing is rarely cost-effective or optimal w.r.t. performance.

I agree. I'd be very suspicious. But, on the other hand, with
potentially twice the market of a motherboard targetted at just one CPU, the
economies of scale could make it cost-effective. But it would definitely be
hard to 'do it right' for both CPUs.

DS

On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 20:09:56 -0500, Yousuf Khan <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>An ECS motherboard that can take either a P4 S775 or an Athlon 64 S939!
>
> Yousuf Khan
>
>HEXUS.net : Review : CEBIT 2005: AMD or Intel? Same Motherboard! : Page
>- 1/1
>http://www.hexus.net/content/reviews...lld19JRD0xMDM2

Well it *is* a separate riser for the Athlon64... though I still can't
figure why I might want it. Here's another weirdo:
http://www.msi.com.tw/program/produc...il.php?UID=642
- a socket 754 with a PCIe x16 and a "AGR" which takes a limited sub-set of
AGP cards. What the hell am I going to use it for?

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

George Macdonald wrote:
> Well it *is* a separate riser for the Athlon64... though I still can't
> figure why I might want it. Here's another weirdo:
> http://www.msi.com.tw/program/produc...il.php?UID=642
> - a socket 754 with a PCIe x16 and a "AGR" which takes a limited sub-set of
> AGP cards. What the hell am I going to use it for?

Actually, it looks like this isn't as limited a subset as you think. It
looks like supports almost all AGP video cards since the AGP-4X days.
This might be the answer people are looking for, if they just bought a
high-end AGP video card just recently, then they can continue to use it
here, until they are ready to go with a PCIE card.

Yousuf Khan

Yousuf Khan wrote:
> George Macdonald wrote:
>
>>Well it *is* a separate riser for the Athlon64... though I still can't
>>figure why I might want it. Here's another weirdo:
>>http://www.msi.com.tw/program/produc...il.php?UID=642
>>- a socket 754 with a PCIe x16 and a "AGR" which takes a limited sub-set of
>>AGP cards. What the hell am I going to use it for?
>
>
> Actually, it looks like this isn't as limited a subset as you think. It
> looks like supports almost all AGP video cards since the AGP-4X days.
> This might be the answer people are looking for, if they just bought a
> high-end AGP video card just recently, then they can continue to use it
> here, until they are ready to go with a PCIE card.
>

I read elsewhere that "AGR" is the term MSI is using when an AGP
slot has been bridged to a PCI-E bus, as opposed to a "true" AGP
slot on a genuine AGP bus to the chipset.

> Rob Stow <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I read elsewhere that "AGR" is the term MSI is using
> when an AGP slot has been bridged to a PCI-E bus, as
> opposed to a "true" AGP slot on a genuine AGP bus to
> the chipset.

I wonder how many PCIe lanes these rigs will use.

And then insert a "new" AGP card that is actually a
native PCIe chipset bridged back to AGP, and the end-
user ends up with impressive latencies.

I suspect that anything "AGP" and/or "bridged" are
quickly going to become anathema to enthusiasts.
But will the general public catch on?

--
Regards, Bob Niland private.php?do=newpm&u=
http://www.access-one.com/rjn email4rjn AT yahoo DOT com
NOT speaking for any employer, client or Internet Service Provider.

Bob Niland wrote:
>>Rob Stow <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
>>I read elsewhere that "AGR" is the term MSI is using
>>when an AGP slot has been bridged to a PCI-E bus, as
>>opposed to a "true" AGP slot on a genuine AGP bus to
>>the chipset.
>
>
> I wonder how many PCIe lanes these rigs will use.

I would assume they are bridged off of the 16 lane slot for a
PCI-E video card. I didn't read the specs too closely, but I
would expect that putting a card in the AGP slot will either
prevent use of the 16 lane slot or reduce it to 8 lanes.

The latter would be comparable to most motherboards that have
what on the surface seems to be a pair 16 lane PCI-E slots, but
in reality they share only 16 lanes between them. If cards are
inserted into both slots, the slots revert to 8 lanes each.

>
> And then insert a "new" AGP card that is actually a
> native PCIe chipset bridged back to AGP, and the end-
> user ends up with impressive latencies.

I'm not sure if that will be much of an issue: if you have one
of these motherboards, then you don't buy a "new" AGP card - you
buy a PCI-E card.

These kinds of motherboards are perhaps targetted at guys who
might want to upgrade their motherboard but either can't afford
to simultaneously replace their AGP card or want to wait for
prices on PCI-E cards to come down.

>
> I suspect that anything "AGP" and/or "bridged" are
> quickly going to become anathema to enthusiasts.
> But will the general public catch on?
>

Rob Stow wrote:
> I read elsewhere that "AGR" is the term MSI is using when an AGP slot
> has been bridged to a PCI-E bus, as opposed to a "true" AGP slot on a
> genuine AGP bus to the chipset.

Yeah, that would be how I'd look at it too. Might add a very tiny amount
of additional latency but the bandwidth should be the same.

Yousuf Khan

Bob Niland wrote:
> I suspect that anything "AGP" and/or "bridged" are
> quickly going to become anathema to enthusiasts.
> But will the general public catch on?

Can't see why anyone would care, as it now stands most of the work is
done within the graphics cards themselves, and the only time major
amounts of data passes between the graphics and the rest of the system
are for non-accelerated graphics.

Besides 8X AGP is well below the speed of 16X PCIE. I think 16X PCIE is
approximately equal to 32X AGP, so plugging an AGP card into a PCIE
bridge would still leave quite a bit of headroom.

Yousuf Khan