What's the best chipset for a P4 in socket 478 ? Intel? Sis ? Via ?

Thanks for any informed opinions !

-RS-

In article <SJNSf.1363$J43.770@edtnps90>, RS says...
> What's the best chipset for a P4 in socket 478 ? Intel? Sis ? Via ?
>
Intel.

--
Conor,

Same ****, different day.

"RS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:SJNSf.1363$J43.770@edtnps90...

> What's the best chipset for a P4 in socket 478 ? Intel? Sis ? Via ?
>
> Thanks for any informed opinions !

I agree with Conor. No matter what is said, Intel is the industry standard,
and I've found they provide the best compatibility and stability. I'm
running the 875p in this desktop along with a P4 3.4 mhz Northwood, and my
notebook has a 915 chipset with P4 Prescott 630 (3.0 mhz). The desktop has
been remarkable for its stability for nearly three years.

>>>>> "Bob" == Bob Davis <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

Bob> "RS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
Bob> news:SJNSf.1363$J43.770@edtnps90...

>> What's the best chipset for a P4 in socket 478 ? Intel? Sis ? Via
>> ?
>>
>> Thanks for any informed opinions !

Bob> I agree with Conor. No matter what is said, Intel is the
Bob> industry standard, and I've found they provide the best
Bob> compatibility and stability. I'm running the 875p in this
Bob> desktop along with a P4 3.4 mhz Northwood, and my notebook has a
Bob> 915 chipset with P4 Prescott 630 (3.0 mhz). The desktop has been
Bob> remarkable for its stability for nearly three years.

Would concur with that also. I have an 875p chipset based computer
that as a general purpose server. The only time it goes down is for
kernal upgrades, to change a harddisk, or the power goes off. However,
the non-intel chipsets have improved.

Another thing nice about intel is there support site is great. I can
still find information about eight year old ppro motherboard. I
recently even upgrade the bios to the latest version amazing.

Later.

Alan

Alan Walpool wrote:

> Would concur with that also. I have an 875p chipset based computer
> that as a general purpose server. The only time it goes down is for
> kernal upgrades, to change a harddisk, or the power goes off. However,
> the non-intel chipsets have improved.
>
> Another thing nice about intel is there support site is great. I can
> still find information about eight year old ppro motherboard. I
> recently even upgrade the bios to the latest version amazing.
>
> Later.
>
> Alan
>

It's hard to find mb's with 875 chipset now but 865 is just as good.

"fleet" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:EOZSf.156952$H%4.22122@pd7tw2no...
> Alan Walpool wrote:
>
>> Would concur with that also. I have an 875p chipset based computer
>> that as a general purpose server. The only time it goes down is for
>> kernal upgrades, to change a harddisk, or the power goes off. However,
>> the non-intel chipsets have improved.
>>
>> Another thing nice about intel is there support site is great. I can
>> still find information about eight year old ppro motherboard. I
>> recently even upgrade the bios to the latest version amazing. Later. Alan
>>
>
> It's hard to find mb's with 875 chipset now but 865 is just as good.

Asus P4C800E-Deluxe boards are fairly common on Ebay, mostly used, and they
have the 875p. I've assembled about six systems in the past six months with
this mobo and P4 Northwood CPU's, and they are all stable. I'm not wild
about the AMI bios, however, especially early versions that get the drive
order mixed up when using IDE drives in mobile racks.

The only difference I know of between the 865 and 875 chipsets is ICH5 vs.
ICH5R. On the latter, you have RAID0 and 1 options. If you won't be doing
RAID, the 865 should be just as good, although many 865 boards have on-board
RAID controllers, like Promise or Silicon Image.

I have a Gigabyte GA-8KNXP (875 chipset), and although very scarce and still
expensive, is a very stable platform. It has three on-chip and on-board
RAID controllers.

On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 06:25:54 GMT, "RS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>What's the best chipset for a P4 in socket 478 ? Intel? Sis ? Via ?
>
>Thanks for any informed opinions !
>
>-RS-
>

Why bother? 478 is a goner. Investing in it now is almost like
throwing money out the window. It makes sense to build 478-based
system only if you are getting the components free (or next to that).
In case you get them free, usually you don't have a choice of chipset
;-)

Only if you already have the CPU and it is relatively decent (2.4+) it
might make sense to buy a board for it. In this case Intel is
technically the best, but you better go with the cheapest one you can
get, and that one will probably be not Intel. You'll lose a few
points of performance, but the times when 478 was at or near the top
of performance charts are long gone anyway - 2003, to be exact.

If you can wait a few more months, there will be a choice between
Conroe from Intel and Athlon64 (socket AM2) from AMD. If you need the
system right now, A64 or Opteron (socket 939) is the way to go. If
you insist on Intel, go with socket 775 (more expensive and not as
good a performer as AMD, but will work). Both ways, 775 or 939, you
get today's high end performance. Or, if the money is tight, the low
end of both sockets would give you decent performance today - about as
good as highest end of 478 - for about as much or even less money
(especially 939), and a viable upgrade path.

NNN

Thanks,

Yeah I realize the 478 is not current. I have a Prescott 2.8/1M/800 . I
bought a reburbed Shuttle 865PE AB60R ... foolishly not knowing that it
doens't support anything much except Northwood.

For the Prescott, I am thinking of the Asus P4V8X-MX
(http://usa.asus.com/products4.aspx?l...82&modelmenu=1)
, which is a VIA chipset mobo.

Comments ?

Thanks for the background info on the current state of the art. I realize
that Intel dual-core is being promoted right now .... If I get the P4V8X-MX
for my Prescott, I still need something for my Shuttle AB60R ... but it's
not worth spending much on a CPU for it, is it ?

Would be interesting to see some benchmarks that compare say the Prescott
and the new dual-core stuff ... and the new AMD stuff.

-RS-

"(E-Mail Removed)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 06:25:54 GMT, "RS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >What's the best chipset for a P4 in socket 478 ? Intel? Sis ? Via ?
> >
> >Thanks for any informed opinions !
> >
> >-RS-
> >
>
> Why bother? 478 is a goner. Investing in it now is almost like
> throwing money out the window. It makes sense to build 478-based
> system only if you are getting the components free (or next to that).
> In case you get them free, usually you don't have a choice of chipset
> ;-)
>
> Only if you already have the CPU and it is relatively decent (2.4+) it
> might make sense to buy a board for it. In this case Intel is
> technically the best, but you better go with the cheapest one you can
> get, and that one will probably be not Intel. You'll lose a few
> points of performance, but the times when 478 was at or near the top
> of performance charts are long gone anyway - 2003, to be exact.
>
> If you can wait a few more months, there will be a choice between
> Conroe from Intel and Athlon64 (socket AM2) from AMD. If you need the
> system right now, A64 or Opteron (socket 939) is the way to go. If
> you insist on Intel, go with socket 775 (more expensive and not as
> good a performer as AMD, but will work). Both ways, 775 or 939, you
> get today's high end performance. Or, if the money is tight, the low
> end of both sockets would give you decent performance today - about as
> good as highest end of 478 - for about as much or even less money
> (especially 939), and a viable upgrade path.
>
> NNN

"(E-Mail Removed)" wrote:
>
> On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 06:25:54 GMT, "RS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >What's the best chipset for a P4 in socket 478 ? Intel? Sis ? Via ?
> >
> >Thanks for any informed opinions !
> >
> >-RS-
> >
>
> Why bother? 478 is a goner. Investing in it now is almost like
> throwing money out the window. It makes sense to build 478-based
> system only if you are getting the components free (or next to that).
> In case you get them free, usually you don't have a choice of chipset
> ;-)
>
> Only if you already have the CPU and it is relatively decent (2.4+) it
> might make sense to buy a board for it. In this case Intel is
> technically the best, but you better go with the cheapest one you can
> get, and that one will probably be not Intel. You'll lose a few
> points of performance, but the times when 478 was at or near the top
> of performance charts are long gone anyway - 2003, to be exact.

I build with a Northwood 2.8/800 in July 2004, it will still be my main
computer for years to come because it isn't slow and it's very cool (39C).
Motherboard is a Gigabyte with Intel 875P chipset.

Bob Davis wrote:
>
> "fleet" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:EOZSf.156952$H%4.22122@pd7tw2no...
> > Alan Walpool wrote:
> >
> >> Would concur with that also. I have an 875p chipset based computer
> >> that as a general purpose server. The only time it goes down is for
> >> kernal upgrades, to change a harddisk, or the power goes off. However,
> >> the non-intel chipsets have improved.
> >>
> >> Another thing nice about intel is there support site is great. I can
> >> still find information about eight year old ppro motherboard. I
> >> recently even upgrade the bios to the latest version amazing. Later. Alan
> >>
> >
> > It's hard to find mb's with 875 chipset now but 865 is just as good.
>
> Asus P4C800E-Deluxe boards are fairly common on Ebay, mostly used, and they
> have the 875p. I've assembled about six systems in the past six months with
> this mobo and P4 Northwood CPU's, and they are all stable. I'm not wild
> about the AMI bios, however, especially early versions that get the drive
> order mixed up when using IDE drives in mobile racks.
>
> The only difference I know of between the 865 and 875 chipsets is ICH5 vs.
> ICH5R. On the latter, you have RAID0 and 1 options. If you won't be doing
> RAID, the 865 should be just as good, although many 865 boards have on-board
> RAID controllers, like Promise or Silicon Image.
>
> I have a Gigabyte GA-8KNXP (875 chipset), and although very scarce and still
> expensive, is a very stable platform. It has three on-chip and on-board
> RAID controllers.

For what it's worth, I read somewhere that the difference between 865 and 875
is that the 875 has something Intel calls PAT = 'Performance Acceleration
Technology". PAT is present in the 865, but disabled. Intel intended to
differentiate the chips for different price segments of the market. However,
to Intel's dismay, some motherboard manufacturers found ways of using
undocumented features to enable the PAT on the 865. But it may require a
specific BIOS upgrade.