Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Granite Bay vs. Canterwood: THG on crack?

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Font
Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 29, 2003 3:48:58 PM

In their most recent <A HREF="http://www.tomshardware.com/mainboard/20030429/index.ht..." target="_new"><font color=green>benchmarking extravaganza</font color=green></A>, Frank and Bert conclude that an overclocked Granite Bay and the Canterwood are "nearly identical". Yet their benchmarks show the Asus P4C800 performing significantly better than the overclocked GB. How can they be so dense? Here's how much better the Canterwood scored:

Q3 640x480x16 Demo001: 10.8%
Q3 640x480x16 NV15Demo: 11.0%
Comanche 4: 2.6%
UT 2003: 1.8%
mp3 Maker: 1.4%
Main Concept: 3.1%
Pinnacle Studio: 3.0%
3DMark2001 SE: 2.6%
3DMark2003: 0.5%
3DMark2003 CPU: 6.8%
WinRAR: 11.5%
Cinema 4D: 2.1%
3D Studio Max: 3.2%
Lightwave 7.5: 1.6%

That's not nearly identical, there are some apps where the differences are major. Keep in mind that the CPU, FSB, and memory are running at the same speed between the two platforms, so the above differences are due solely to the chipset. Pretty healthy if you ask me!

The Abit Canterwood board is pretty disappointing though. I'm not surprised that the Asus takes the crown.

Ritesh

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by ritesh_laud on 04/29/03 10:49 AM.</EM></FONT></P>

More about : granite bay canterwood thg crack

April 29, 2003 4:10:36 PM

I think that someone at THG was smoking something when they wrote this article. The Canterwood is meant to be a <i>workstation</i> motherboard <i>and</i> it was <i>just</i> released, so of <i>course</i> it's pricey. Springdale will be the replacement for GraniteBay, not Canterwood.

Besides, even a 10% performance increase from <i>just</i> a new mobo is commendable. To get as much as 11.5% is great in my opinion. It may not be worth the upgrade for current GraniteBay owners, but certainly worth considering when buying a new system. And it <i>officially</i> supports DDR400 and 800MHz FSB CPUs, so you still have a waranty. If you OC GraniteBay...

<font color=blue><pre>I'm proud to be an American,
who served my country in the US Air Force,
to protect the rights of my fellow Americans,
to hold protests against others like me.</pre><p></font color=blue>
April 29, 2003 5:04:24 PM

Quote:
Springdale will be the replacement for GraniteBay, not Canterwood.

Springdale replaces 845pe
Canterwood replaces Granitebay
Related resources
April 29, 2003 5:27:01 PM

No, Canterwood replaces i850E, not Granite Bay.
April 29, 2003 5:30:50 PM

and yes THG has lost it's mind. whats next "ahh lets compare canterwood to the AMD761 chipset - we conclude that both chipsets perform exactly" - reminds me of the Iraqi information minister lol! "we have no troops in baghdad *US guns shooting*" lol!

geese ...

Women defines the word irrational!

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?id=9933" target="_new"> My Rig </A>
April 29, 2003 5:32:23 PM

Absolutely. i875 and Granite Bay do <i>not</i> have "nearly identical" performances. Canterwood performs better... THG nonsense!

THG´s ability to make conclusions based on what they <i>want</i> to be true amazes me from time to time... It´s not as if they are impartial...
April 29, 2003 6:14:16 PM

Quote:
Springdale replaces 845pe
Canterwood replaces Granitebay

<i>Technically</i> that is <i>almost</i> true. GraniteBay was <i>meant</i> to be the leader in the single-CPU workstation chipsets. Canterwood is meant to be the leader in the single-CPU workstation chipsets. So in theory, Canterwood should be replacing GraniteBay.

However, reality is far from theory in this case. Granite Bay failed miserably in convincing people that it was a suitable replacement for the i850E. The only place left for it was desktop then, to replace the weak performance of the i845.

And because that is how it really went, Mephistopheles is right. Springdale replaces desktop, which was GraniteBay, which was previously i845. Canterwood replaces the workstation, which was the i850 which held it's own for a very long time.

So the only world in which Canterwood replaces GraniteBay is the world of theory. And if we live in that world of theory, then we also have to accept that Intel is selling the Canterwood as both a desktop and a workstation chipset, which leaves absolutely no place for Springdale to live and that Canterwood will always be the replacement for the i845. That's an awfully expensive replacement if you ask me. The world of theory is indeed strange. Reality is just so much easier to follow in this case. :) 

<font color=blue><pre>I'm proud to be an American,
who served my country in the US Air Force,
to protect the rights of my fellow Americans,
to hold protests against others like me.</pre><p></font color=blue>
April 29, 2003 6:23:39 PM

For a site that makes so much of relatively minor differences between various motherboards and chipsets etc. ("11 VIAXXXX Mobos put the test; buy the one that scores an extra 10 points on PCMark 2002"), describing the quite different performance of GB and 875 as 'nearly identical' is rather odd...
April 29, 2003 6:55:18 PM

I agree with most of the posts here. Another thing I want ot bring up is that although the granite can reach a similar performance to the Canterwood when overclocked, So ummm what happens when the canterwood is overclocked in a similar fashion as the granite..... I would consider that a viable comparison but saying something overclock is the same as something not overclocked is a bit far fetched.
April 29, 2003 7:00:20 PM

Quote:
For a site that makes so much of relatively minor differences between various motherboards and chipsets etc. ("11 VIAXXXX Mobos put the test; buy the one that scores an extra 10 points on PCMark 2002"), describing the quite different performance of GB and 875 as 'nearly identical' is rather odd...

Exactly. Just because Abit's Canterwood board sucked arse doesn't mean that all Canterwood boards perform the same or worse than GraniteBay boards. After all, it was an Asus board that kicked the arse of an Asus board. You can't get more fair than that.

<font color=purple><pre><b>There are 10 types of people in this world: those who can understand binary and those who can't.</b></pre><p></font color=purple>
April 29, 2003 8:30:34 PM

Before we close our minds entirely, what if the Asus board was slightly overclocked?
Anandtech reported past Asus boards clocked as much as 100MHZ above the rated clock. Here this one ran at 2947MHZ, Asus could've had theirs jammed at 3100MHZ for all we know.

And yes it can make a difference. So whether or not it was a really screwed up conclusion on their part, one side still remains untold, the stock clock, and it could change the whole thing. If not, then yes, THG has gone wild crazy.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
April 29, 2003 8:58:49 PM

Especially since the Abit Canterwood boards have <i>known issues</i> with being unable to support aggressive memory timings. Abit is working on a patch for it now...


<font color=green>The Netherlands is where you go when you're too good for heaven.</font color=green> :tongue:
April 29, 2003 9:21:11 PM

I agree that this review is a little "off", but there is one underlying very important point brought to light in this article that I think that the majority of you are either overlooking or not giving enough credit to.

That is the fact that Granite Bay can easily run the new 800MHz FSB CPUs without any problems! Yes, it may not perform as well as all of the i875 Chipset boards, but its STABLE. So basically for all the people with existing Granit Bay boards that want to stay on the "cutting edge", you don't HAVE to drop another $200+ for a new i875 board. You can keep your existing GB board and just get one of the new CPUs.
April 29, 2003 11:51:44 PM

Quote:
So basically for all the people with existing Granit Bay boards that want to stay on the "cutting edge", you don't HAVE to drop another $200+ for a new i875 board. You can keep your existing GB board and just get one of the new CPUs.

Yes, that is correct! Why pay $200 (actually, about $160) for a new i875 motherboard (and about $260 for a new processor) when you can pay $600 for a new Vapochill and overclock your processor in a Granite Bay motherboard? Who would want stability and a warranty for less money?

For those who overclock, who would want the better components on the i875 motherboard? I mean certainly a Granite Bay motherboard will clock just as high as an i875 motherboard, right? And if not, who needs to actually meet the 200MHz external clock anyway... slightly under stock speeds is good enough, right? Guys? Hello? Hmm, where did everyone go? ...

-Raystonn


= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
April 30, 2003 12:45:10 AM

overclockers need canterwood if they're overclocking a native 200fsb chip
regular users who want to upgrade to 200mhz fsb don't need a new motherboard, granite bay will suit them just fine - that's the point

<A HREF="http://www.planettribes.com/allyourbase/ayb2.swf" target="_new">411 UR 84$E R 8E10NG 2 U$</A>
April 30, 2003 12:47:07 AM

Exactly.. Thank you LtBlue
April 30, 2003 2:18:35 AM

Quote:
regular users who want to upgrade to 200mhz fsb don't need a new motherboard, granite bay will suit them just fine

Sure, if they purchase a $600 Vapochil unit they may get their System Bus up to about 750MHz (that is a 187MHz external clock). This is the limit of what the team at Tom's Hardware accomplished. Are you going to pay $600 for a Vapochill with no guarantee of results or stability, or would you rather pay less than $500 for a brand new CPU and motherboard that is guaranteed to run at an 800MHz System Bus?

-Raystonn


= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
April 30, 2003 2:21:58 AM

actualy the point he makes in the article is that the advent of pats technology which has been a long journey for intel and they have spent alot of resources on its developement, isnt all that revolutionary in the canterwood in light of the fact that all you have to do to achieve nearly the same results and the 200 fsb in the granite bay is set it.
no expensive solutions or complicated cooling systems, no mods to the chip itself, just go in the bios and if you have the motherboard and memory yuo can achieve 200 fsb without heating up the southbridge.

meaning the technology was in place just not complete.
so point is why would you or anyone not just upgraders, spend $595 for a canterwood, and $220 for the board, when you can get a granite bay for $150, and a board for $190, thats $820 vs $370, over $400 more for not a heck of alot more performance.you can build two of the slightly slower systems for the price of one canterwood.

i was thinking of building a canterwood but was going to wait unitl prices fell, i thought i would go with a barton and an nforce 2 board in the meantime, now i see the above system upgrade will cost me $30 more to go with a p4 2.xghz on an asus board and run the fsb at or near 200mhz.
for the money surely it is the way to go.

so i think the point of the article was that for the cost difference they are nearly the same, and it is disapointing to see the ability to hit those speeds were so easy with the granite bay.
how much more will there be to go now with a canterwood? is the canterwood just a granite bay with every last drop squeezed leaving you no room to oc further?
do you think the p4 533 @ 200 fsb would out run an nforce at 166 = 333?

someone sarcasticaly said
"Yes, that is correct! Why pay $200 (actually, about $160) for a new i875( WRONG there over $200 everywhere, us dollars.)

motherboard (and about $260 for a new processor) 260? lol (try $590 everywhere ive seen including newegg.com.)

when you can pay $600 for a new Vapochill and overclock your processor in a Granite Bay motherboard?
(umm he specificaly said in the article he hit the 200 fsb in every case, without any heating or stability issues.)
no mention of an expensive case or cooling.

Who would want stability and a warranty for less money?"

you can get it stable and very close to speed for a LOT less money, not a little. as i said shop it yourself, its a $400 difference for not a lot of performance gains.

you can build two 2.x ghz p4's on the older asus board and run the fsb at 200 without stability issues or heating up. and save the money.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by lumper on 04/29/03 10:47 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
April 30, 2003 2:22:55 AM

If you can prove the latest article has a Vapochill unit used to get the 200MHZ clock, and that it is not as easy as it sounds, then I'll believe you. Until then you're only trying to sell your company's name, and get them an extra 200$ aside from the new ~400$ CPU.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
April 30, 2003 2:27:24 AM

Not to mention, the 3GHZ P4 won't let you overclock too far if you plan to, it's already reaching a thermal limit, and the fact there is no other 800MT CPU out there, means that if you want Canterwood, you will pay a lot, just for a little more performance and yes, you won't really extract much more, by overclocking.

And Canterwood in my eyes is still a disappointment, not at all the killer it sounded, nor does everything it offers, is that good. At only 78% of the max bandwidth (96% for the Athlon 64) only used, it proves the board is relatively inefficient despite PAT, and for that, the 6.4 limit will never be reached and the 400MT DDR and 200MHZ FSB is only wasted.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
April 30, 2003 4:28:24 AM

I have yet to see any FSB reach 100%, you would need ZERO latency in the memory controller, and no chipset as far as I know can give you 100% bandwidth to the cpu, so you'll always see something less than the bandwith of the memory on the FSB.
This is normal, how close you get is what matters. If this is what you were talking about.

Also canterwood is for 800mhz FSB, if you dont have a P3 3.0c no sense in buying the board if you're not going to run such a cpu on it.

I think canterwood is kicking some butt with 3.0C from the benches I seen, it's pretty impressive.


AMD 64bit cpu is good, but still lags behind in some things, I saw the benches on those athlon 64 is impressive with 32 bit apps in somethings, but it sucked in some other things.
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Galvin on 04/30/03 00:31 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
April 30, 2003 4:41:27 AM

for one thing, the right 2.4Bs (costa rica SL6RZ and SL6EFs) will often do 3.6Ghz with watercooling, no phase change necessary
second, my point was that you can buy a native 3.0C - which does not need vapochill to run at 800mhz fsb - and run it fine on the granite bay, in case you want to upgrade

<A HREF="http://www.planettribes.com/allyourbase/ayb2.swf" target="_new">411 UR 84$E R 8E10NG 2 U$</A>
April 30, 2003 7:23:21 AM

Quote:
If you can prove the latest article has a Vapochill unit used to get the 200MHZ clock

In <A HREF="http://www4.tomshardware.com/cpu/20021216/index.html" target="_new">this first article</A> and again in <A HREF="http://www6.tomshardware.com/howto/20030224/asetek_vapo..." target="_new">this second article</A> they clearly show that phase-change cooling, such as that used in a Vapochill, is required to get the processor up near a 200MHz external clock. The <A HREF="http://www.tomshardware.com/mainboard/20030429/index.ht..." target="_new">latest article</A> actually used a stock 3GHz Pentium 4 that officially supported a 200MHz external clock (800MHz System Bus). This is a far cry from what everyone seems to think he did, which is overclocking the processor as well. The processor itself was running at stock speeds at 3GHz core/800MHz System Bus.

-Raystonn


= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
April 30, 2003 11:34:59 AM

You must be the only thinking differently, I was under the impression everyone here knew that THG ran it stock clock with an OCed mobo!

If it were the opposite, I'd agree with you on the value of this. Though even then, the overall cost is still high for a new Canterwood 3GHZ system.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
April 30, 2003 1:57:56 PM

Quote:
The latest article actually used a stock 3GHz Pentium 4 that officially supported a 200MHz external clock (800MHz System Bus). This is a far cry from what everyone seems to think he did, which is overclocking the processor as well.

Personally I thought it was pretty clear that the processor was not overclocked, only the chipset was. Exotic cooling is certainly not necessary here, but since the GB is not validated for operation at 200 MHz many people may not be able to hit that FSB.

Anyway, THG's conclusion about the Canterwood is clearly incorrect. It smokes the GB in bandwidth-heavy apps. I mean, >10% difference simply from using a different chipset running at identical speed? That's not a far cry from the improvement in the Athlon's performance when it went from SDR to DDR. But here the FSB, memory, and CPU are all identical. No wonder so many reviews are glowing about this chipset. Next month Intel will likely own the enthusiast market when it releases cheap HT 2.4s at 800 FSB and people run them on Canterwoods.

One more thing Intel can do to make life very hard for AMD: double the cache on the Northwood-based Celerons and bring the FSB up to 533. The P4 will have 512K cache, 800 FSB, and HT, so it will always have better performance than the Celeron and can still command the price premium. But the Celeron would be an excellent budget processor with 256K cache and 533 FSB.

The Athlon64 has to be a homerun or AMD will lose massive market share this year. :wink:

Ritesh
April 30, 2003 5:01:52 PM

Just replying to all, clicked reply on last post.

First off the GB motherboards do not have the clock gens the 865/875 chipsets has. and there is no guarentee that you will reach 200FSB on a GB board. I have had several and tried many times to breach 200FSB.

One of my projects was to get a SL6RY <A HREF="http://fugger.netfirms.com/210.jpg" target="_new">(2.26Ghz P4 OEM)</A> that I knew could get passed 200FSB. This CPU could not break 180ish FSB on GB. The GB board provided more volts too. To tell people the own GB boards that they can run all 800FSB processors on their boards is just plain wrong. I also used phase change cooling and the most relaxed memory timing on PC3500 that I know can reach 440Mhz DDR. So 1:1 ratio should have been no problem.

After getting my ES chip and trying again, I was only able to reach 180FSB with stability on GB GA-8INXP.

The GA-SINXP maxed out at 169FSB, I lose stability at 170FSB. Memory timing had to be relaxed considerably to run at 169FSB with stability. 166FSB was optimal since I could run much more agressive memory timing.

Needless to say, not all GB boards will hit 200FSB.

Lets see GB hit <A HREF="http://fugger.netfirms.com/270fsb.jpg" target="_new">these kind of numbers</A>

<b>"Granted I dont own a P4. But I read enough stuff and waste enough time on forums newsgroups IRC and computer news sites that I proberly know more then if I DID own a P4." -vk2amv</b>
April 30, 2003 7:06:18 PM

canterwood PAT give less perf that is DDR 400 optimization.

[-peep-] french
May 1, 2003 12:42:49 PM

Lumper:
The price diffs on pricewatch are:
P4 800MHz FSB 3.0GHz 503.99
P4 533MHz FSB 3.06GHz 381.98
P4C800 Deluxe Motherboard 162.50
P4G8X Deluxe Motherboard 166.00
Difference between 800MHz Solution and 533MHz solution? 118.51

So a canterwood solution costs $118.51 more and the board is cheaper than the granite bay solution and upgradable to the future... the comparison saying 400$ difference between the two is way way off.

Shadus
May 1, 2003 3:33:49 PM

price on P4 3.0 will drop by a good amount when stock of P4 533 fsb reach a lower level

[-peep-] french
May 1, 2003 8:23:05 PM

And then... I will buy one and my system will be complete ;) 



To err is human... to really screw things up you need a computer!
!