Best offers
|
P7P55D Motherboard (Intel Socket H... | $149.99 Newegg.com More info |
|
M4A785TD-V EVO AMD 785G/SB710 Socket... | $84.99 Newegg.com More info |
|
GA-P55-UD4P Motherboard (Intel Socket... | $169.99 Newegg.com More info |
|
GA-P55-UD3R Motherboard (Intel Socket... | $139.99 Newegg.com More info |
|
M4A78T-E Motherboard (AMD, AM3, AMD... | $129.99 Newegg.com More info |
- atom 230 review
- intel atom 230 processor review
- intel atom 230 review
- via nano motherboard
- intel atom performance review
- intel atom motherboard review
- via nano l2100
- amd 780g review
- more about the 780g chipset
- nano or atom
- via nano review
- gigabyte bios update without floppy
- intel® atom™ 230 processor review
- atom 230 power consumption
- athlon 64 2000
Partners
The Games selection
crazy :
PC Breakdown
What is worst than a Fatal Error occuring during a game you did not save? Unleash your rage at your PC in this game. Blow it to pieces, it feels so...
|
kids :
Bob
Throw bubbles so as to make the ones that appear in the game disappear. For this, use the Right / Left arrow keys to duck or move about, and the...
|
Sponsored links
- Email |
- Print |
- Comments (47) |
- Share
We looked for a socket AM2 platform that would be capable of supporting all sorts of processors, including the rather old socket AM2 single-core Athlon 64 processors based on the Lima core-–this is what we used for this review. The 8 W 1,000 MHz Athlon 64 2000+ worked immediately without any BIOS update, although the BIOS did not identify it by the correct model number.
All motherboard components are passively cooled, which for us is mandatory for a low-power system. A fan does not only introduce potential noise, but it also adds slightly more power consumption and a point of failure. The four-phase voltage regulator is powerful enough to even run a high-end Phenom X4 processor, and it is certainly capable of accommodating the low-power Athlon 64 2000+.
True All-In-One Solution
Compared to the other products, the Gigabyte AMD 780G motherboard is the largest one, as it has micro-ATX dimensions. But the advantages are obvious. You get four, instead of only two, DIMM sockets, six Serial ATA/300 ports (one eSATA), D-Sub analog VGA, digital DVI and HDMI outputs (the competitors only offer an old analog port, which is the least flexible), two 32-bit PCI slots, and one x16 PCI Express slot, plus another x1 PCIe slot for upgrades. The plethora of USB 2.0 ports should really please everyone, and there are even floppy and UltraATA connectors, as well as a FireWire/400 port and the now-mandatory HD audio.
Great System Power Consumption
You’d tend to believe that the large number features might be counter-productive to promoting a low-power platform. Typically, that’d be true. However, we used the same high-efficiency power supply for all test systems, which means that power consumption gets as low as it can be. In the case of the Athlon 64 2000+ system with Gigabyte’s MA78GM board, this was the same, amazing 28 W idle power that the other systems reached. Peak power was higher than the Atom system’s peak value, but it was lower than our measurements with the VIA system.
- 1 / 3
- Next
-
I'd like to see how much electricity you would save in a year by having an efficient machine for basic home use - the one you could leave on 24/7 guilt free
There are some things with this test review that pussles me. Why did you use 3,5" drives? They draw about 10 watt instead of 2 watt for 2,5" drives. Also, I think you could have used a much more energy efficent power supply. That is probably why they all had the same idle watt; the psu was the bottleneck.
I use a setup with the following:
Jetway VIA C7 1.2 GHz
picoPSU 60 watt power supply
1 GB Kingston DDR2 667 Mhz RAM
250 GB Samsung 2,5" drive
This setup only draws about 20 watt when working and even less when idle (measured with a wall socket device, so I know it's accurate and total).
http://www.mini-pc.de/catalog/il/420
http://www.mini-pc.de/catalog/il/338
/Alex
By the way, It would have been interesting also to see you review the dual core Atom.
And maybe also compared to a more modest "normal" computer instead of a gaming rig, to see how low you can get with a normal PC.
Otherwise an interesting article, as they most often are.
/Alex
My last entry for today...
http://www.mini-pc.de/catalog/il/941
(And no, I don't work for the company...)
Here is a very nice review including the dual core Atom 330. I also has many more benchmarks.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/c [...] anano.html
This review could be seen by some as using very selective benchmarks.
my underclocked ADO5400IAA5DO consumes ~5W more than athlon in ths reaview, but I have 2x1000Mhz
as a bonus I can always relax minimum power requirement and take performance route a step or two 
I sugest to try "AMD NPT Family 0Fh Desktop Processor Power and Thermal Data Sheet" document on the www.amd.com - interesting read
by the way, my geode lx800 (500MHz) board on the full load fits into 6W
It would be nice to build Core2 Duo (or even Solo) and under-clock it to similar power envelope (not very much unlike AMD system)... I wonder how It would compare with the rest of the bunch.
n/a, what power supply do you use?
The WinRAR graph is wrong, or the comment about it is wrong. There's a typo in the Winzip comment.
WinRAR: "Still, VIA’s Nano still is more powerful."
Well, it looks to me like Atom won.
Winzip: "Hence VIA’s Atom does well again."
Oops
Really stupid test setup ...
Using slowest AMD clocked 1Ghz vs 1.6Ghz Atom and 1.8Ghz via ... You should use faster x2 losing only few more watts but gaining fastest and best platform in test.
Atom is including old platform slow crap, but this "test" is obviously aimed to show that AMD is bad, buy intel. Choosing BEST cpu from intel and VIA and testing it against SLOWEST AMD ... what is the point???
This AMD 1Ghz/8W will have aprox 12W on 1.5Ghz ... and then including excellent 780G chipset will be total winner of all test including price, performance per watt etc.
Choosing BEST cpu from intel...
If Atom is the best, Intel is screwed.
Does CPU manufacturers sometimes pay reviewers for reviews? I was just wondering because I have it on other websites but fortunately not here.
Does CPU manufacturers sometimes pay reviewers for reviews? I was just wondering because I have it on other websites but fortunately not here.
Have what, Faithful?
The WinRAR graph is wrong, or the comment about it is wrong. There's a typo in the Winzip comment.WinRAR: "Still, VIA’s Nano still is more powerful."Well, it looks to me like Atom won.Winzip: "Hence VIA’s Atom does well again."Oops
Nice catch Random, fixed.
The AMD processor is clocked at 1000MHz. One ideea for the next article would be to take a real 2000+ Lima (or even an X2) and underclock it until it reaches 10-15 W (not 8). This would be a much more fair comparasion with VIA, because that particular solution needs 18W, so you could argue that the bast comparison would be a VIA at 18W and a AMD also at 18W (probably a Lima at 1600Mhz, or a X2 at 1000Mhz). Any chance at this article being done?
..because I have seen it.."
the atom processor would always win in this segment.
the price. the design and manufacturing technology for the atom will allow intel and consumers on a win-win situation. profitable for intel and low prices for consumers while offering adequate performance for net use.
i am sure the atom can still use less power.
its as if, intel drove the atom to maximum clockspeed for the given die space and architecture so that it can achieve that adequate performance.
CPU-Z memory speed for Athlon X2 is right. K8 processors have minimum divider 1/5 from clock speed, so at 1000 MHz it just cant go above 200 MHz physical clock or 400 MT/s (DDR2-400). You can check it with C&C on any Athlon - drop to 800 MHz, and the memory goes DDR2-320 (160 MHz physical). So i wonder why you use horrible 6-6-6 timings for the memory? At DDR2-400 it should have no problems with 3-3-3.
I'm glad this was mentioned!
I had problems with other reviewers that would insist on using 1000W power supplies for low power consumption hardware, the P/S efficiency is only around 50-65% on low power conversion.