Gigabyte Announces Quad-Core J1900-Based Motherboard

News
By
published

Gigabyte's new J1900-based motherboard is even more feature-rich.

Not long ago, Gigabyte announced its J1800-based motherboard. Now, it brings us the J1900N-D3V board, which carries a quad-core Celeron J1900 chip. Alongside this upgrade, the motherboard also features a number of other improved goodies.

The Celeron J1900 chip is a Bay Trail-based chip, operating four cores at a clock speed of 2.0 GHz. The integrated Intel HD graphics runs at 688 MHz, though it can boost up to 854 MHz. The TDP of all of this is just 10 W, allowing Gigabyte to have the chip passively cooled.

Internal connectivity consists of two DDR3-SODIMM slots, two SATA2 ports, a single PCI port, and a Mini-PCIe slot. Rear I/O connectivity is handled by a pair of PS/2 ports, a pair of serial COM ports, DVI, VGA, four USB 3.0 ports, stereo audio jacks, as well as dual Gigabit Ethernet. Gigabyte has also equipped the board with its DualBIOS, which is a very nice addition for a budget board.

There was no word on pricing or availability yet.

See more Motherboards News
Niels Broekhuijsen
Niels Broekhuijsen

Niels Broekhuijsen is a Contributing Writer for Tom's Hardware US. He reviews cases, water cooling and pc builds.

20 Comments Comment from the forums
  • Shawna593767
    How would this compare to an Intel Core 2 Quad at the same clocks?
    Reply
  • ocilfa
    @Shawna: This soc gets a score of about 2000 on passmark, while a 2.4ghz core 2 quad gets 2970. Not too bad considering it only uses 10w at most.
    Reply
  • runswindows95
    @Shawna: This soc gets a score of about 2000 on passmark, while a 2.4ghz core 2 quad gets 2970. Not too bad considering it only uses 10w at most.
    These motherboards keep intriguing me. I'm happy with my 2Ghz Core2Duo laptop for the longest time, and if these CPU's are just as good, I can build a low power desktop for cheap.
    Reply
  • rolandzhang3
    Would make a nice server or a light media machine :D
    Reply
  • teh_chem
    How would this compare to an Intel Core 2 Quad at the same clocks?
    At the same clocks, this
    @Shawna: This soc gets a score of about 2000 on passmark, while a 2.4ghz core 2 quad gets 2970. Not too bad considering it only uses 10w at most.
    As respectable as its performance/power consumption is, this will be significantly slower in virtually everything when compared to a C2Q at the same clockspeed.
    Reply
  • Aiden Wright
    Why a PCI port?
    Reply
  • sonofliberty08
    give us some AMD APU based mini-itx board, or maybe some ARM based board will be nice to have too
    Reply
  • funguseater
    Yet no HDMI, not much of a media platform.
    Reply
  • dextermat
    Celeron CPU are always ok when they get out but watch out for slowdown 1 or 2 after.
    Reply
  • buhow
    "Unfortunately, we didn’t have an iPad Mini Retina on hand to test to do a direct performance comparison to an equivalent iOS device."Then, how can you have the audacity to title this fluff piece with something including "iPad Mini Retina Killer"???I was going into this article with the expectation of a reasonable comparison, but credibility was completely lost at this point for me, since there is definitely no difficulty in obtaining an iPad Mini, even for a lowly tech journalist who presumably has the dedicated time, reason, and budget for just such a purchase. I had to double check the date of the article to make sure it wasn't written in 2012 or something... nope. Weak, extremely weak.
    Reply