|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#1 |
|
Pewlius Caesar
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ascot, Berks
Posts: 18,021
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Zotac GeForce 9300 (MCP7a) Motherboard
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/200...-motherboard/1
No, you're not reading that wrong - Zotac is the first with the new Nvidia integrated graphics chipset for Intel CPUs. We take the potentially popular budget and HTPC platform and give it a work through to see if Zotac can make motherboards just as well as graphics cards.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Get On My Horse!!!
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Balhannah, South Australia
Posts: 3,949
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Looks like a fantastic HTPC board. I really like the colour combo of orange and blue. I may use that in a future mod lol.
Once again a very nice review.
__________________
Project: LEXA FINISHED 30/11/08 (16 months 14 days) MOTM Nominee October 08 Project: LEXA Revival FINISHED
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
You were R3veNG'ed >:-)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Hasselt - Belgium
Posts: 10
![]() |
In the last section:
Zotac's board isn't the fastest or most capable out there, but for just being stable and for HTPC playback it's the best Intel solution currently available. The Nvidia GeForce 9300 ... Shouldn't that be nvidia ?? Great review ! |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Pewlius Caesar
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ascot, Berks
Posts: 18,021
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Best integrated graphics solution for Intel processors
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
hardware freak
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Nevada, USA
Posts: 121
![]() |
What? No overclocking section with your cascade phase change setup? You are losing your touch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
Richard Swinburne
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Omnipwntent
Posts: 28,264
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
. I tried, got about 80MHz FSB which is pants.GPU overclocks like a rocket though - we maxed it out on the Nitro
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Supermodder
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 529
![]() |
I know I keep repeating myself but...
An HTPC board without "analogue" TV out? S-Video...Component? Xir
__________________
SN25P A64 3700+ (San Diego) 2 GB DDR400 OCZ Platinum EL 2-3-2-5 1T X1800XT 512mb Sapphire 200GB Samsung SP2004C |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
I'm not a modder.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Bury St Edmunds/Durham Uni
Posts: 1,845
![]() ![]() |
How does it do on games? A quick benchmark on something not too demanding would be nice to see!
I do like the colour scheme and it seems a good board so long as your aren't trying to overclock it, which you aren't going to in an HTPC. I suppose you might want to underclock though.
__________________
i7 920, 8800GTS 512, 6GB Corsair all in an Intel DX58SO; 3*320GB RAID5; CM Stacker ![]() Samsung Q45. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
Richard Swinburne
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Omnipwntent
Posts: 28,264
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
Xir - only very, very few boards offer(ed) component without an adapter and none these days. It's all HDMI, VGA and DVI! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Pewlius Caesar
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ascot, Berks
Posts: 18,021
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I've got some plans to include the GeForce 9300 board in my 4550 review that's currently being worked on...
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 | |
|
Richard Swinburne
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Omnipwntent
Posts: 28,264
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Ultramodder
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,220
![]() |
first i thought. aah! a micro ATX HTPC board!. And stopped reading when I saw the IDE and FDD cables and most importantly the Active cooling solution.
__________________
Mascleta: "The most accurate simulation of thunder, humans can simulate..." The answer is 42, so... whats the question again? If you know what 'Peek' and 'Poke' represents, then you are probably as old as me. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 | ||||||||||
|
Multimodder
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Milton Keynes, UK
Posts: 190
![]() |
From the other geforce 9 series article:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
On page 10 Quote:
The performance of the G45 with the Casino Royale BD-DVD looks suspicious to me. The cpu usage seems so high that it might be a software issue somewhere. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I have to say that the HDHQV score for the 9300 was very impressive if not all that relevant for blu-ray movies as you pointed out. Overall a promising chipset which will only get better with driver and bios revisions. Nice review Bindi Last edited by Renoir; 18th Oct 2008 at 04:50. Reason: added comment o |
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |||||||
|
Richard Swinburne
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Omnipwntent
Posts: 28,264
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
Intel G45 still doesn't have in built TMDS (consistent typo - D is closer than M ) - the mini-ITX board has two. It's cheaper for Intel not to have to pay HDCP and HDMI licenses and also because they have massive OEM business most of these customers still want VGA only. This is also probably why G45 has a HDCP repeater issue perhaps.On the website it's referring to the motherboard above I think - it says DDR3-1333 without mentioning DDR2. Nvidia were clear about it not including IDE and the Zotac motherboard would not include a JMB386 controller if it didn't need it ![]() Yea it's missing advanced path which there is a setting of in the drivers and I was told it was disabled but forgot to put it in - I was waiting for more BIOS details about the other two settings as well. But either way, unlinked mode is still **** and the memory settings are completely FUBAR for DDR2 right now.Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Decoding has its own specific hardware, but the shaders do the deinterlacing and some other processing - resizing too iirc. But it's all down to software to use it efficiently - Intel's ClearVideo deinterlacing codec is fantastic compared to AMD's and Nvidia's. Quote:
Quote:
I always find my stress level increases when I see your posts though :P:P:P
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
#15 | |||||||||||
|
Multimodder
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Milton Keynes, UK
Posts: 190
![]() |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
)
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
#16 | |
|
Supermodder
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 529
![]() |
Quote:
I guess as long as Philips manages to sell DVD-Players that only have a Scart and a Component out (so you can hook it up to your beamer in the worst possible quality) there's not enough of a problem. Of course this problem will fade over the next few years...but then again PC's are just used a few years. Flatscreens really started selling around here 3-4 years ago...HD-ready (720) without HDMI or DVI or VGA in. For about 1-2 years now, the mainstream models (still HD-ready 720) have been equipped with VGA in woohoo! Xir
__________________
SN25P A64 3700+ (San Diego) 2 GB DDR400 OCZ Platinum EL 2-3-2-5 1T X1800XT 512mb Sapphire 200GB Samsung SP2004C |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Multimodder
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Milton Keynes, UK
Posts: 190
![]() |
Any comments on my post Bindi especially related to my comments on the issues of pata support & 16vs8 shaders?
Also in case you're not already reading this I recommend the following blogger for information on intel integrated graphics. In particular his post on the HDCP repeater issue is very interesting and suggests that your theory above on the issue may not be correct. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Pewlius Caesar
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ascot, Berks
Posts: 18,021
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Each TPC (thread processing cluster) in G8x/G9x derived GPUs has 16 shaders, split into two blocks of eight SPs - all GPUs after G80 have eight texture address/filtering units per TPC, while G80 had four texture address/eight texture filtering units per TPC. These are shared amongst the two blocks of eight SPs and each texture unit is accessible by ANY of the 16 stream processors in that TPC.
I can't see how Nvidia could make a part with less than 16 stream processors if it's derived from G8x/G9x and less than 24 stream processors if it's derived from GT200, as there would have to be some fairly substantial changes to the transistor layout. Pretty much all of the GPUs Nvidia launches follow on from when the new architecture is launched (OK, GT200 is hardly 'new', but it is tweaked) and the number of TPCs and ROPs are just scaled to suit the needs of the price point Nvidia is trying to hit with a particular GPU. The actual TPCs and ROPs remain the same - they're self-sufficient and the number of them is scalable. If GeForce 8200 was an eight SP part, it would be as much of a new architecture as GT200 is when compared to G80/G92 - it's 24 SPs and 8 TMUs per TPC. ![]() Further to support this was the fact that Nvidia could not do mismatched SLI due to what I've been told are scheduling issues and massive driver overhead. To the best of my knowledge, the only cards that support GeForce Boost are cards with 16 stream processors and it's because of this 'problem' Nvidia has had with getting mismatched SLI to scale properly.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Multimodder
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Milton Keynes, UK
Posts: 190
![]() |
Thanks for the reply Tim! I've just read another couple of reviews which also say it's 16 shaders so I suppose we just have to put it down to an error on anandtech's side. In that case what do you attribute the significantly increased performance to?
Also do you have any idea why most motherboard manufacturer's appear to be releasing mobos with only single-link dvi when the chipset supports dual-link? Last edited by Renoir; 22nd Oct 2008 at 16:35. Reason: added question on dual link dvi |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 | |
|
Richard Swinburne
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Omnipwntent
Posts: 28,264
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
Ren - I'll read the rest of your post in a minute and edit this, but I had Nvidia sitting there telling me the 8200 was 8-shader when I questioned it was 16, yet, unless GPU-Z is consistently wrong I can only assume 16. GPU-Z currently doesn't read 9300 so I can't check the difference. Iirc Tech Report confirmed our finding of 16 for 8200 too originally, maybe I'm wrong. I remember reading it though. It can mix-match clocks between the 8400 GS (16 shader part) fine, but mis-matching shader quantities is far more difficult. EDIT: IDE - maybe Nvidia originally included it but it's currently broken in the final silicon? The chipset is heavily delayed after all. The difference with Intel GbE is that the Intel GbE solution costs more than a marvell or realtek chipset who companies already have contracts with (they buy huuuuge amounts for every board), whereas using native IDE requires no extra chipset = saved $$$. 690G - I've no board to check any more and I can't remember for the life of me. AMD also said to me that the 780G PCI-E x16 lane could be split into two x8s, but in actual fact, it couldn't. They also said the SB700+ would have HyperFlash support... Our discussion about LVDS was different - the LVDS hardware is (usually) external to the GPU and powers a display on its own. I'm not doubting the slide but my question is: why would AMD go backwards from dual support on the 690G to single digital output on 780G? The 9300 is faster simply because it uses an Intel CPU and has a direct access to main memory without going through the CPU. I would guess it's probably mostly CPU driven at very low resolution and graphical features - the 9300 is faster than the 790GX even and it has a lower clock. As for shader processing - I think driver optimisation is a bigger limitation and access to performance than raw shader power. It's also dependent on the software playing it too - PowerDVD/Archos/WinDVD/MPC-HC all handle the playback %age differently. |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|