Asus P5N7A-VM: Geforce 9300 IGP

Want to talk about one of the articles in SPCR? Here's the forum for you.
Devonavar
SPCR Reviewer
Posts: 1850
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 11:23 am
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

Asus P5N7A-VM: Geforce 9300 IGP

Post by Devonavar » Sat Nov 29, 2008 3:14 pm


Redzo
Posts: 464
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 1:51 am
Location: Sweden, Stockholm

Post by Redzo » Mon Dec 01, 2008 4:55 pm

Nice review ! Am really glad to see that you mentioned overclocking in the article. Done with some sanity and common sense it is a great way of extracting great deal of performance for free :-).

Jay_S
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 713
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2006 2:50 pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Post by Jay_S » Mon Dec 01, 2008 7:38 pm

I'm starting to research my next HTPC, and am focusing on GeForce 8200 and 9300 IGP motherboards. Right now, one can purchase the ASUS M3N78-VM plus an AMD 4850e processor for $135.

The Intel/9300 P5N7A-VM motherboard in the review article is $120 all by itself.

From the recent IGP comparisons on Anandtech, the 8200 and 9300 offer basically equivalent video performance.

So... Is there any compelling reason to go with the more expensive Intel/9300 over AMD/8200 for HTPC use?

MikeC
Site Admin
Posts: 12283
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Contact:

Post by MikeC » Mon Dec 01, 2008 8:47 pm

Jay_S wrote:So... Is there any compelling reason to go with the more expensive Intel/9300 over AMD/8200 for HTPC use?
Probably not, esp. if $$ is a major factor.

porkchop
Posts: 496
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 1:19 am
Location: Australia

Post by porkchop » Mon Dec 01, 2008 10:03 pm

onboard graphics beating a current gen(ish) low-end discreet card brings a smile to my face :)

Aris
Posts: 2299
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 10:29 am
Location: Bellevue, Nebraska
Contact:

Post by Aris » Mon Dec 01, 2008 11:12 pm

Speaking of lower power consumption, i saw this review that compared the an Nvidia 9400 board with the P5N71-VM, and the 9400 used less power. Maybe you could review this Gigabyte GA-E7AUM-DS2H next?

http://www.trustedreviews.com/motherboa ... UM-DS2H/p4

Strid
Posts: 397
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:09 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Post by Strid » Tue Dec 02, 2008 2:13 am

porkchop wrote:onboard graphics beating a current gen(ish) low-end discreet card brings a smile to my face :)
Yeah, I felt like ... David beating, if not Goliath, then at least Goliaths younger sibling, LOL. :)

Simply awesome! I also like how they packed almost every possible connector onto the back plate. Makes me want to get one of these!

I also like the review format. Simple and seems to work and include all I want to know (and then some more). Btw, I think there was a slip in the intro "(...) and the G31 boards, which had limited features and a relatively high price-tag.".

Anyway, it is interesting, that the Gigabyte 9400 is less power consuming than the ASUS 9300, since the difference between 9400 and 9300 is nothing but increased clock speed on the graphics core, IIRC? Must be something inherent with the Gigabyte features that is not on the ASUS board. If that is true, the Gigabyte board is AWESOME.

Another thing that struck me is how ASUS placed the COM1 and LPT1 headers on the top right cornor of the board. Seems like an odd spot if you want to have the header on the back at an expansion port.

Tobias
Posts: 530
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2003 9:52 am

Post by Tobias » Tue Dec 02, 2008 2:43 am

Although only reviewing the boards of one manufacture might bring some sort of consistency, I get concerned that spcr might seem to be in bed with Asus. Almost all of the recent mobo-reviews has been on ASUS boards and 2 of the last 3 gfx cards reviewed were Asus (the third a reference card).

I do understand that not all manufacturers sends boards for reviewing, but I would imagine that others might be swayed by the chance to get reviewed in an objective way with the numbers to back the conclusions up in a venue that has currently been almost exclusive to one of their biggest competitors...

Aris
Posts: 2299
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 10:29 am
Location: Bellevue, Nebraska
Contact:

Post by Aris » Tue Dec 02, 2008 7:41 am

Tobias wrote:Although only reviewing the boards of one manufacture might bring some sort of consistency, I get concerned that spcr might seem to be in bed with Asus. Almost all of the recent mobo-reviews has been on ASUS boards and 2 of the last 3 gfx cards reviewed were Asus (the third a reference card).

I do understand that not all manufacturers sends boards for reviewing, but I would imagine that others might be swayed by the chance to get reviewed in an objective way with the numbers to back the conclusions up in a venue that has currently been almost exclusive to one of their biggest competitors...
So would you prefer MikeC turn down the opportunity to review an item just because its made by Asus? As far as i know, he doesnt purchase any of the items reviewed, if Asus is the only manufacturer that sends him samples, how is that his fault?

bozar
Posts: 305
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 10:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Post by bozar » Tue Dec 02, 2008 8:00 am

I'm impressed with the results but due to the bad firewire performance and stability issues that previous nforce chipset suffered from, I'd never pick a nvidia chipset again.

QuietOC
Posts: 1407
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2005 1:08 pm
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Post by QuietOC » Tue Dec 02, 2008 9:01 am

porkchop wrote:onboard graphics beating a current gen(ish) low-end discreet card brings a smile to my face :)
No, current gen is Radeon HD 4xx0 and Geforce 2xx.

It is on par with two or three generation old cards. It basically is a Geforce 8500GT--a card that didn't really outperform a Geforce 7600GS/7300GT.

CA_Steve
Moderator
Posts: 7489
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 4:36 am
Location: St. Louis, MO

Post by CA_Steve » Tue Dec 02, 2008 9:30 am

Thanks for the review, Lawrence :D

mLy!
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun May 20, 2007 6:57 am
Location: Belgium

Post by mLy! » Tue Dec 02, 2008 10:03 am

if it wasn't for the very high price I would have bought one of these allready :(

Lawrence Lee
SPCR Reviewer
Posts: 1115
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 9:07 pm
Location: Vancouver

Post by Lawrence Lee » Tue Dec 02, 2008 10:18 am

Tobias wrote:Although only reviewing the boards of one manufacture might bring some sort of consistency, I get concerned that spcr might seem to be in bed with Asus. Almost all of the recent mobo-reviews has been on ASUS boards and 2 of the last 3 gfx cards reviewed were Asus (the third a reference card).
Asus does send us a lot of stuff, but if we were really "in bed" with them, we'd sugar-coat everything. When they do something wrong on one of their products, we're not shy about pointing them out.

rpsgc
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 1630
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 1:59 am
Location: Portugal

Post by rpsgc » Tue Dec 02, 2008 10:23 am

QuietOC wrote:
porkchop wrote:onboard graphics beating a current gen(ish) low-end discreet card brings a smile to my face :)
No, current gen is Radeon HD 4xx0 and Geforce 2xx.

It is on par with two or three generation old cards. It basically is a Geforce 8500GT--a card that didn't really outperform a Geforce 7600GS/7300GT.
He's talking about how it beat the Radeon HD 3450, a not so old discrete card.

QuietOC
Posts: 1407
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2005 1:08 pm
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Post by QuietOC » Tue Dec 02, 2008 10:46 am

rpsgc wrote: He's talking about how it beat the Radeon HD 3450, a not so old discrete card.
The HD 3450 was slower/less efficient than the card it replaced (HD 2400 XT)--a lemon, really.
Last edited by QuietOC on Tue Dec 02, 2008 11:08 am, edited 2 times in total.

Cistron
Posts: 617
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 5:18 am
Location: London, UK

Post by Cistron » Tue Dec 02, 2008 11:04 am

You're turning into a troll QuietOC, no need to split hairs.

Nice review. Too bad that I don't need an HTPC.

Tobias
Posts: 530
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2003 9:52 am

Post by Tobias » Tue Dec 02, 2008 12:17 pm

Aris wrote: So would you prefer MikeC turn down the opportunity to review an item just because its made by Asus? As far as i know, he doesnt purchase any of the items reviewed, if Asus is the only manufacturer that sends him samples, how is that his fault?
I did not intend to put blame on anyone for anything. Make no mistake, spcr reviews are the only reviews I ever bother to read. I am only concerned that something that isn't thought of might make spcr questionable, when so much trouble and effort goes into making sound quality reviews.
Asus does send us a lot of stuff, but if we were really "in bed" with them, we'd sugar-coat everything. When they do something wrong on one of their products, we're not shy about pointing them out.
I know, I'm just thinking that mentioning how much uncontested (and thourogh) press asus gets, might sway other manufaturers somewhat :)

Strid
Posts: 397
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:09 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Post by Strid » Tue Dec 02, 2008 12:23 pm

Tobias wrote:I know, I'm just thinking that mentioning how much uncontested (and thourogh) press asus gets, might sway other manufaturers somewhat :)
Hopefully sway them into sending silentpcreview.com MORE products to test. :lol:

MikeC
Site Admin
Posts: 12283
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Contact:

Post by MikeC » Tue Dec 02, 2008 12:51 pm

Have to admit, I'm not sure why so few of the other board makers send us stuff. Sometimes we even ask!

Zenphic
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 107
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 12:54 pm
Location: Quebec, Canada

Post by Zenphic » Tue Dec 02, 2008 1:02 pm

I've been wanting you guys to review the ASUS P5N7A-VM for quite some time. The 730i/GeForce 9300 is a really good chipset for the Intel platform. I was planning on getting one, but price-wise it's just not worth it. Lowest in Canada atm is like $140! Almost 60$ more than AMD's 780G motherboards :?

autoboy
Posts: 1008
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 8:10 pm
Location: San Jose, California

Post by autoboy » Tue Dec 02, 2008 1:40 pm

Wouldn't it make sense to do IGP tests with dual channel memory? You are reducing the overall bandwidth available to the graphics solution.

croddie
Posts: 541
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 8:52 pm

Post by croddie » Tue Dec 02, 2008 1:53 pm

Nice chipset, definitely promising. Hopefully you can get lower power boards with the same chipset, maybe in the mini itx form factor. (Since mini itx boards are designed for lower power processors and less cooling, with the mini-itx DG45FC being well ahead of other mobos with the same chipset.)

Seconding autoboy, I would use dual channel with low power memory sticks unless you need to compare with previous tests, since that's the configuration most people will be using the board with.

colm
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 8:22 am
Location: maine

Post by colm » Tue Dec 02, 2008 4:02 pm

Another note to mention, even after thier obvious improvements, is the need for vista for dx10 and the shader 4.0 stuff. (That is where I am currently standing my ground with xP and losing a little bit...)

Staying where you are if content enough might be a good idea to wait for windows 7....

Lawrence Lee
SPCR Reviewer
Posts: 1115
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 9:07 pm
Location: Vancouver

Post by Lawrence Lee » Tue Dec 02, 2008 5:49 pm

Zenphic wrote:I was planning on getting one, but price-wise it's just not worth it. Lowest in Canada atm is like $140! Almost 60$ more than AMD's 780G motherboards :?
Consider it an Intel "tax."

Wouldn't it make sense to do IGP tests with dual channel memory? You are reducing the overall bandwidth available to the graphics solution.
We do 3DMark with 2GB in dual channel, but for video playback it doesn't make any difference.

oyvine
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 1:38 pm
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Contact:

FSB vs power consumption

Post by oyvine » Thu Dec 04, 2008 1:51 am

Hi,
thank you very much for an excellent review :) I am(was) a bit confused about FSB and multipliers for the intel core 2 duo processors. I thought that the multiplier was locked, but it seems that the multiplier is not locked on the wolfdale core. I wonder how much the power consumption would decrease if the FSB was clocked at 800Mhz instead of 1066Mhz? Is this board capable of 1080p playback with the FSB at 800Mhz?

best regards,
Øyvin Eikeland

Monkeh16
Posts: 507
Joined: Sun May 04, 2008 2:57 pm
Location: England

Re: FSB vs power consumption

Post by Monkeh16 » Thu Dec 04, 2008 4:09 am

oyvine wrote:Hi,
thank you very much for an excellent review :) I am(was) a bit confused about FSB and multipliers for the intel core 2 duo processors. I thought that the multiplier was locked, but it seems that the multiplier is not locked on the wolfdale core. I wonder how much the power consumption would decrease if the FSB was clocked at 800Mhz instead of 1066Mhz? Is this board capable of 1080p playback with the FSB at 800Mhz?

best regards,
Øyvin Eikeland
The multiplier is locked at a maximum value. You can drop it, but not raise it.
Dropping the FSB probably wouldn't save much power, but would cost you a lot of performance even if the CPU could be run at normal clocks.

Lawrence Lee
SPCR Reviewer
Posts: 1115
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 9:07 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: FSB vs power consumption

Post by Lawrence Lee » Thu Dec 04, 2008 12:52 pm

oyvine wrote:I wonder how much the power consumption would decrease if the FSB was clocked at 800Mhz instead of 1066Mhz? Is this board capable of 1080p playback with the FSB at 800Mhz?
The underclocked test results were at 800MHz effective FSB with a total clock speed of 1.2GHz (200MHz x 6) @ 0.93125V.

Tzupy
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 1561
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 10:47 am
Location: Bucharest, Romania

Post by Tzupy » Fri Dec 05, 2008 7:19 am

Am I missing something, or there was no mention of the Hybrid Power feature in the article?
If the 9300 / 9400 chipset supports Hybrid Power, it would have been nice to test it with: 9800 GT, 9800 GTX+ and GTX 260.

Strid
Posts: 397
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:09 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Post by Strid » Fri Dec 05, 2008 7:36 am

Tzupy wrote:Am I missing something, or there was no mention of the Hybrid Power feature in the article?
If the 9300 / 9400 chipset supports Hybrid Power, it would have been nice to test it with: 9800 GT, 9800 GTX+ and GTX 260.
It doesn't - would have been cool (not a pun) if it did, though. I can't see why they left out the feature - there is really no reason for that.

http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_ge ... pu_us.html

Post Reply