# NVIDIA nForce 980a SLI Reference Platform Motherboard Pictured



## btarunr (Mar 27, 2009)

Pursuing legal action against Intel for bringing its Intel-compatible platform development to a grinding halt due to legal complications, NVIDIA has kept its platform development for AMD on track. The company has made the nForce 980a SLI platform official, that supports the latest Phenom II series processors from AMD. The company published the product page on its website, and has pictured its reference design motherboard based on the chipset. The motherboard carries the "designed by NVIDIA" marking, which makes it a design that several of its AIC partners such as EVGA, XFX, Zotac, etc., can use simultaneously. 

The motherboard sports the nForce 980a SLI chipset, paired with the nForce 200 PCI-Express bridge chip. The motherboard features a GeForce 8300-class IGP, with DVI-D and D-Sub outputs. It supports NVIDIA 3-way SLI and Quad-SLI. As an AMD platform, the chipset supports AM2, AM2+ and AM3 socket processors, with DDR3 and DDR2 memory support (depending on the processor). A 5-phase digital PWM circuit powers the processor. The nForce 980a SLI and nForce 200 chips are located adjacent to each other, and are cooled actively by a fan-heatsink. The product design looks production-grade and may attract partners to sell it. 



 

 



*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## cdawall (Mar 27, 2009)

woot my new mobo


----------



## btarunr (Mar 27, 2009)

Many Thanks to Castiel for sending this in.


----------



## Darknova (Mar 27, 2009)

Digital PWMs instead of MOSFETs? Now that is interesting, better have good cooling on those.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 27, 2009)

that chipset cooler is in a PITA spot if you wand to do any upgrading


----------



## KBD (Mar 27, 2009)

yay! finally some AM3 competition for the ATI chipsets. Though 980a sounds weird should've been 790a or something. I wonder whats gonna happen when they make the 900 series chipsets and 980a name is already taken up?


----------



## Castiel (Mar 27, 2009)

I can't wait for this. Finally a Nvidia board!

Thanks Btarunr


----------



## BackSlash (Mar 27, 2009)

Interesting, I just want to see how this perform agains 790FX/750  and what about temps


----------



## LittleLizard (Mar 27, 2009)

wonder why they dont use all solid cap design as most manufacturers. also the chipset cooling sucks so hard :shadedshu


----------



## CDdude55 (Mar 27, 2009)

Should rock for those AMD people, looks like a 780i board.


----------



## btarunr (Mar 27, 2009)

CDdude55 said:


> Should rock for those AMD people, looks like a 780i board.



It is essentially identical to 780a SLI, except for that it is qualified to support AM3, DDR3.


----------



## mlee49 (Mar 27, 2009)

Holy crap thats a hell of a board! 





Castiel said:


> I can't wait for this. Finally a Nvidia board!
> 
> Thanks Btarunr



Thanks for submitting this!


----------



## cdawall (Mar 27, 2009)

LittleLizard said:


> wonder why they dont use all solid cap design as most manufacturers. also the chipset cooling sucks so hard :shadedshu



it looks like a cheapy XFX tbh bet thats why its not so fancy looking the EVGA and Asus version will be much better and i want to see a crosshair III


----------



## btarunr (Mar 27, 2009)

cdawall said:


> it looks like a cheapy XFX tbh bet thats why its not so fancy looking the EVGA and Asus version will be much better and i want to see a crosshair III



Logical naming (for the 980a AM3 board) would be Crosshair II Extreme, but you never know.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 27, 2009)

btarunr said:


> Logical naming (for the 980a AM3 board) would be Crosshair II Extreme, but you never know.



nah i want it to say crosshair III


----------



## Baam (Mar 27, 2009)

Nice to see more options for Phenom II.


----------



## ShadowFold (Mar 27, 2009)

I actually might want one if they make a Crosshair III. I don't need crossfire or anything


----------



## Blacksniper87 (Mar 27, 2009)

looks pretty sweet though don't nvidia chipsets have some issues??


----------



## kyle2020 (Mar 27, 2009)

Lack of SSC's? Made up for in looks mind - damn sexy board.


----------



## ShadowFold (Mar 27, 2009)

Blacksniper87 said:


> looks pretty sweet though don't nvidia chipsets have some issues??



No, cdawall had his 945 at 3.9ghz on a 780a, I don't think these are gonna be bad at all


----------



## cdawall (Mar 28, 2009)

ShadowFold said:


> No, cdawall had his 945 at 3.9ghz on a 780a, I don't think these are gonna be bad at all



*cough*4.9ghz*cough*




Blacksniper87 said:


> looks pretty sweet though don't nvidia chipsets have some issues??



never once had an issue with mine


----------



## denice25 (Mar 28, 2009)

sounds very interesting.. thanks for this post!


----------



## Weer (Mar 28, 2009)

Why is everyone worked up about a motherboard that doesn't support Core i7?


----------



## cdawall (Mar 28, 2009)

why be excited about i7 boards they are all the same board with the pci-e slots moved around


----------



## p_o_s_pc (Mar 28, 2009)

looks sweet. can't wait for it to come out


----------



## Weer (Mar 28, 2009)

cdawall said:


> why be excited about i7 boards they are all the same board with the pci-e slots moved around



So how is this any different?


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Mar 28, 2009)

cdawall said:


> that chipset cooler is in a PITA spot if you wand to do any upgrading



Waterblock with L-shaped nozzles could work I suppose.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 28, 2009)

Weer said:


> So how is this any different?



well seeing how with AMD you can get just about any board from both AMD and NV its not all the same chipset and each chipset has its own unike overclocking quirks i would for sure call that different. hell i'll list just the mid/high-end chipsets you can choose from for AMD then the ones you can choose from on intel

*AMD*
780G,790X,790GX,790FX,780A,980A,750A
*intel*
X58

anyone see something wrong here or am i just missing something



DaedalusHelios said:


> Waterblock with L-shaped nozzles could work I suppose.



its probably just this mobo (XFX) that has it in an odd spot bet the EVGA and Asus have it in a better location


----------



## KBD (Mar 28, 2009)

cdawall said:


> well seeing how with AMD you can get just about any board from both AMD and NV its not all the same chipset and each chipset has its own unike overclocking quirks i would for sure call that different. hell i'll list just the mid/high-end chipsets you can choose from for AMD then the ones you can choose from on intel
> 
> *AMD*
> 780G,790X,790GX,790FX,780A,980A,750A
> ...




Yea, i agree with cdwall. Corei7 is not the only game in town. And those of us that want some variety not to mention somewhat lower prices brought to us due to some healthy competition look to what AMD has to offer as well. Because Intel is being such a bitch there is just one chipset supporting i7, its not clear whether nvidia will be allowed to make theirs for this Intel platform. AMD is not stopping Nvidia from making theirs for Phenom II which only makes them look better.


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Mar 28, 2009)

The price of AMD motherboards are the only reason why I consider going AMD Phenom 2. They're are so many reasonable choices it makes up for a lack of a competitor to i7. I don't know how they keep the motherboard prices reasonable but it works.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 28, 2009)

DaedalusHelios said:


> The price of AMD motherboards are the only reason why I consider going AMD Phenom 2. They're are so many reasonable choices it makes up for a lack of a competitor to i7. I don't know how they keep the motherboard prices reasonable but it works.



its real simple how they keep prices low the have those option things that intel doesn't. look at X58 thats what a lack of cometition will do to prices.


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Mar 28, 2009)

cdawall said:


> its real simple how they keep prices low the have those option things that intel doesn't. look at X58 thats what a lack of cometition will do to prices.



Well there were plenty of options before the i7 flagship which is still in infancy.

But back when C2D's were king, the same options on an intel board would be cheaper on an AMD board. It could be because the AMD chips perform more duties than the intel equivalents due to the built in memory controller possibly? So less on the AMD motherboard equals simpler design or lower costs to the motherboard manufacturers.

It could be "what the market will bare" coming into effect and AMD users demanding lower prices than intel users too.

Its hard to say.


----------



## pentastar111 (Mar 29, 2009)

I trhink it would be really cool if they came out with an AMD board that allowed the end user to be able to go with either cross-fire or sli.


----------



## ShadowFold (Mar 29, 2009)

pentastar111 said:


> I trhink it would be really cool if they came out with an AMD board that allowed the end user to be able to go with either cross-fire or sli.



The AsRock 780A does that


----------



## suraswami (Mar 29, 2009)

Woo Hoo, one more decent AMD mobo.  Good to see.


----------



## Weer (Mar 29, 2009)

cdawall said:


> well seeing how with AMD you can get just about any board from both AMD and NV its not all the same chipset and each chipset has its own unike overclocking quirks i would for sure call that different. hell i'll list just the mid/high-end chipsets you can choose from for AMD then the ones you can choose from on intel
> 
> *AMD*
> 780G,790X,790GX,790FX,780A,980A,750A
> ...



Well, that's just with the new Core i7. It's too new to have more than one chipset. Not to mention that it does not, in any way, need anything more than X58, because X58 has everything. More revisions do not equal a better product.

If you want to compare Core 2, then you got 680i, 650i, 630i, P33, P35, P45, X38, X48, etc.
The only difference is that AMD is trying to sneak in backwards compatibility to win over consumers, at loss of performance.


----------



## p_o_s_pc (Mar 29, 2009)

Weer said:


> Well, that's just with the new Core i7. It's too new to have more than one chipset. Not to mention that it does not, in any way, need anything more than X58, because X58 has everything. More revisions do not equal a better product.
> 
> If you want to compare Core 2, then you got 680i, 650i, 630i, P33, P35, P45, X38, X48, etc.
> The only difference is that AMD is trying to sneak in backwards compatibility to win over consumers, at loss of performance.



performance loss isn't that great considering the money you save and the performance you gain upgrading to a better chip.im NOT disagreeing that there is a performance loss because there is


----------



## Hayder_Master (Mar 29, 2009)

nice but i expect they increase the IGP much , ok they say it is nforce200 so this can do haybard SLI with GTX200 series or only it is just a name and only SLI with 8400 and 8500 cards


----------



## cdawall (Mar 29, 2009)

Weer said:


> Well, that's just with the new Core i7. It's too new to have more than one chipset. Not to mention that it does not, in any way, need anything more than X58, because X58 has everything. More revisions do not equal a better product.
> 
> If you want to compare Core 2, then you got 680i, 650i, 630i, P33, P35, P45, X38, X48, etc.
> The only difference is that AMD is trying to sneak in backwards compatibility to win over consumers, at loss of performance.



ummm hold on i'm calling bullshit right there. pop a Q9450 in a 6x0i board and tell me if it works. thats intel saying f you to nvidia again. oh and AM3 is brand new newer that i7 in fact and we already have 790GX, 790FX and 980A so again this i7 is too new crap is straight up BS


----------



## btarunr (Mar 29, 2009)

cdawall said:


> ummm hold on i'm calling bullshit right there. pop a Q9450 in a 6x0i board and tell me if it works. thats intel saying f you to nvidia again. oh and AM3 is brand new newer that i7 in fact and we already have 790GX, 790FX and 980A so again this i7 is too new crap is straight up BS



OK, now find me a nForce 590 SLI (AMD), or AMD 580X CrossFire motherboard that supports Phenom II. 

People tend put Phenom II with its competitive class and product generation as that of the Core i7. That is so wrong. Phenom II belongs to the generation 45nm Core 2 processors (Wolfdale/Yorkfield) belong to, not Core i7. Technically, an AM2 socket should be able to run Phenom II, just like how the Intel 945P did support FSB 1066 MHz, and could hence extend support to some Core 2 Duo CPUs, but market forces made sure the benefit of backwards-compatibility never got passed on to the consumer. Both Intel and AMD are equally victim to this.


----------



## Weer (Mar 29, 2009)

btarunr said:


> OK, now find me a nForce 590 SLI (AMD), or AMD 580X CrossFire motherboard that supports Phenom II.
> 
> People tend put Phenom II with its competitive class and product generation as that of the Core i7. That is so wrong. Phenom II belongs to the generation 45nm Core 2 processors (Wolfdale/Yorkfield) belong to, not Core i7. Technically, an AM2 socket should be able to run Phenom II, just like how the Intel 945P did support FSB 1066 MHz, and could hence extend support to some Core 2 Duo CPUs, but market forces made sure the benefit of backwards-compatibility never got passed on to the consumer. Both Intel and AMD are equally victim to this.



It looks like I'm really not needed on this forum with bt covering for me. Perfect post.
It's not Intel saying "eff you" to nVidia. As btarunr so eloquently said, the 6x0i chipset was simply outdated and was not meant to run Quads at all. Only the A1 edition of the XFX/eVGA 680i chipsets were capable of sustaining any real speed on Quad-core CPU's. If anything, it's nVidia saying "eff you" to Intel, or their fans; depends on you look at it.. by knowing of Quads ahead of time and not fashioning a good enough chipset to go along with it, as part of their line-up in any way. Even 780i which came out a year later, and was basically a re-hashed 680i wasn't capable of doing a good enough job. Only 790i, and that was dwarfed by X48. There's a fair amount of history here.

Let me just add one thing. Core i7 doesn't _need_ anything more than X58, as I've said. X58 has everything one could need. X58 + 920 = perfect; if you can afford it. It's not quantity, it's quality.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 29, 2009)

btarunr said:


> OK, now find me a nForce 590 SLI (AMD), or AMD 580X CrossFire motherboard that supports Phenom II.
> 
> People tend put Phenom II with its competitive class and product generation as that of the Core i7. That is so wrong. Phenom II belongs to the generation 45nm Core 2 processors (Wolfdale/Yorkfield) belong to, not Core i7. Technically, an AM2 socket should be able to run Phenom II, just like how the Intel 945P did support FSB 1066 MHz, and could hence extend support to some Core 2 Duo CPUs, but market forces made sure the benefit of backwards-compatibility never got passed on to the consumer. Both Intel and AMD are equally victim to this.



it doesn't "support" it but go on AMD game forums and several users have old 480X boards with phenom II's on them. just about any board that supports phenom's will boot and run a phenom II it will just not take advantage of the added benifits of the chip IE unlocked chips wont give the full range of multi's




Weer said:


> It looks like I'm really not needed on this forum with bt covering for me. Perfect post.
> It's not Intel saying "eff you" to nVidia. As btarunr so eloquently said, the 6x0i chipset was simply outdated and was not meant to run Quads at all. Only the A1 edition of the XFX/eVGA 680i chipsets were capable of sustaining any real speed on Quad-core CPU's. If anything, it's nVidia saying "eff you" to Intel, or their fans; depends on you look at it.. by knowing of Quads ahead of time and not fashioning a good enough chipset to go along with it, as part of their line-up in any way. Even 780i which came out a year later, and was basically a re-hashed 680i wasn't capable of doing a good enough job. Only 790i, and that was dwarfed by X48. There's a fair amount of history here.
> 
> Let me just add one thing. Core i7 doesn't _need_ anything more than X58, as I've said. X58 has everything one could need. X58 + 920 = perfect; if you can afford it. It's not quantity, it's quality.



only issue i have is that the X58 chipset is still not all that great AMD chips show better scaling on there chipsets than i7 does on X58. this is true when you look at just about any multi card setup, there was a thread on XS with about 100 examples of this. same clocks on the cards and comparable clocks on the chips the single card was all X58 but as soon as they put a second card on the board AMD gained 20-30% intel may gain 15% max. AMD caught up in performance to i7 as soon as another card was added. tell how even x8/x8 790GX can scale multi card better than X58?

and 780i wasn't all bad with quads several people got good clocks out of it. not the best but good clocks for sure. 6xi supported all of the 65nm quads it may not have clocked them to a 1600mhz FSB but it supported them it however did not support even the same clocked 45nm quads which is what i was trying to say.


----------



## btarunr (Mar 29, 2009)

cdawall said:


> it doesn't "support" it but go on AMD game forums and several users have old 480X boards with phenom II's on them. just about any board that supports phenom's will boot and run a phenom II it will just not take advantage of the added benifits of the chip IE unlocked chips wont give the full range of multi's



Well, I'm definitely not the 1337-hax0r that can somehow get new processors to run on old   chipsets. I'm the kind that looks up CPU-support lists, sees if a BIOS from the manufacturer can get the board to work, and then back my claims that the typical AM2 motherboard does not support Phenom II. Even ASUS' best AM2 motherboard, the Crosshair, doesn't do so.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 29, 2009)

btarunr said:


> Well, I'm definitely not the 1337-hax0r that can somehow get new processors to run on old   chipsets. I'm the kind that looks up CPU-support lists, sees if a BIOS from the manufacturer can get the board to work, and then back my claims that the typical AM2 motherboard does not support Phenom II. Even ASUS' best AM2 motherboard, the Crosshair, doesn't do so.



just cause a chip is not on the support list doesn't mean it wont work electronically phenom II and phenom I wont have a huge difference hence them working on the same chipset. this is why even though Asus sent my crosshair II with the old 0502 Bios i could boot with a phenom II no issues. that BIOS only supports phenom I.



hell look at the nforce 3 based asrock board with the riser card it will run phenom II now if that doesn't show backwards compatibility i dont know what will


----------



## btarunr (Mar 29, 2009)

cdawall said:


> just cause a chip is not on the support list doesn't mean it wont work electronically phenom II and phenom I wont have a huge difference hence them working on the same chipset. this is why even though Asus sent my crosshair II with the old 0502 Bios i could boot with a phenom II no issues. that BIOS only supports phenom I.



Ah, now going by the same logic, Core 2 Extreme QX6700 should run on Intel 925X chipset (supports FSB 1066, 4 logical CPUs), something that's generations older than even AM2, but that doesn't.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 29, 2009)

btarunr said:


> Ah, now going by the same logic, Core 2 Extreme QX6700 should run on Intel 925X chipset (supports FSB 1066, 4 logical CPUs), something that's generations older than even AM2, but that doesn't.



phenom II on 690G

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/257095-28-phenom-690g-works
















phenom II on NV 560






phenom II on NV 570SLI






phenom II on NV 590SLI

http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=506438





phenom on nforce 3

http://www.asrock.com/support/Phenom2.asp


full support on 590SLI

http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=527094


----------



## btarunr (Mar 29, 2009)

Now look at the CPU-Support list from the said manufacturers and see if Phenom II lists. It most likely won't, except for that ASRock nForce 3 motherboard. ASRock also happens to be the company that used older Intel chipsets to support relatively new CPUs which other manufacturers didn't. People may have gotten Phenom II to work on older chipsets, but motherboard manufacturers officially don't list it. That doesn't hurt my argument one bit, which is that you cannot place Phenom II and Core i7 in the same generation, and say that Phenom II offers backwards platform compatibility. The same can also be said for LGA-775 processors and their multiple instances of working on older chipsets.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 29, 2009)

btarunr said:


> Now look at the CPU-Support list from the said manufacturers and see if Phenom II lists. It most likely won't, except for that ASRock nForce 3 motherboard. ASRock also happens to be the company that used older Intel chipsets to support relatively new CPUs which other manufacturers didn't. People may have gotten Phenom II to work on older chipsets, but motherboard manufacturers officially don't list it. That doesn't hurt my argument one bit, which is that you cannot place Phenom II and Core i7 in the same generation, and say that Phenom II offers backwards platform compatibility. The same can also be said for LGA-775 processors and their multiple instances of working on older chipsets.



you said to find 590SLi supporting phenom II and the asus M2A32SLI does. the older chipsets that will support phenom I will support phenom II its as simple as that


----------



## btarunr (Mar 29, 2009)

cdawall said:


> you said to find 590SLi supporting phenom II and the asus M2A32SLI does. the older chipsets that will support phenom I will support phenom II its as simple as that



The ASUS boards you linked to, did get Phenom II to work, but neither of their CPU-support lists say they do i.e. the manufacturers didn't list support for Phenom II, they didn't release BIOS that did so. My argument doesn't cover people somehow getting it to work, it covers that which when a manufacturer lists its nForce 590 SLI supports it. You should get the idea.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 29, 2009)

btarunr said:


> The ASUS boards you linked to, did get Phenom II to work, but neither of their CPU-support lists say they do i.e. the manufacturers didn't list support for Phenom II, they didn't release BIOS that did so. My argument doesn't cover people somehow getting it to work, it covers that which when a manufacturer lists its nForce 590 SLI supports it. You should get the idea.



the only way for cpuz to read a phenom as a 940 X4 as opposed to a phenom unknown is for there to be bios support


*bios support*




*no bios support*






and there is no somehow getting it to work any board that supports phenom I supports phenom II. i could plug my phenom II 955 into a POS nvidia 6150 based board and it would work with the phenom I bios


----------



## erocker (Mar 29, 2009)

Weer said:


> Well, that's just with the new Core i7. It's too new to have more than one chipset. Not to mention that it does not, in any way, need anything more than X58, because X58 has everything. More revisions do not equal a better product.
> 
> If you want to compare Core 2, then you got 680i, 650i, 630i, P33, P35, P45, X38, X48, etc.
> The only difference is that AMD is trying to sneak in backwards compatibility to win over consumers, at loss of performance.



Lets not forget P31, G31, G35, P41, P43....  There are plenty of Intel options that directly compete with AMD and do it in the same price bracket.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 29, 2009)

erocker said:


> Lets not forget P31, G31, G35, P41, P43....  There are plenty of Intel options that directly compete with AMD and do it in the same price bracket.



thats only on C2D's side though it has nothig to do with the single chipset available for i7. oh and from the way things are looking intel will be the only company making a chipset for i5 as well


----------



## erocker (Mar 29, 2009)

cdawall said:


> thats only on C2D's side though it has nothig to do with the single chipset available for i7. oh and from the way things are looking intel will be the only company making a chipset for i5 as well



C2D competes with AMD processors with comparable performance and a wide range of chipsets/motherboards to use.  Comparing PII to Core i7 just doesn't make sense to me.  It looks to me like i5 is going to be fail.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 29, 2009)

erocker said:


> C2D competes with AMD processors with comparable performance and a wide range of chipsets/motherboards to use.  Comparing PII to Core i7 just doesn't make sense to me.  It looks to me like i5 is going to be fail.



that is true but the original post i was comparing to was intel only needs X58 which is utter BS and you and me both know that intel chipsets clock well but they do not offer the best of really anything else.


----------



## erocker (Mar 29, 2009)

Their chipsets look cool and have awesome heatpipes and stuff though!  I agree with ya.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 29, 2009)

erocker said:


> Their chipsets look cool and have awesome heatpipes and stuff though!  I agree with ya.



oh well maybe AMD will have some i7 beating chips soon i have a feeling that the 6 core's server chips will hold an advantage in true multitasking over the i7 server chips since HT is not the same as another core....now if those 6 core chips hit the mainstream we might have an i7 beater 3.8-4.2ghz (air clocked) on the unlocked chips with 6 cores would be pretty BA


----------



## PP Mguire (Mar 30, 2009)

Somebody was saying something about Asus boards?

Asus already has their 980a pictured on their site.


----------



## Wile E (Mar 30, 2009)

cdawall said:


> it doesn't "support" it but go on AMD game forums and several users have old 480X boards with phenom II's on them. just about any board that supports phenom's will boot and run a phenom II it will just not take advantage of the added benifits of the chip IE unlocked chips wont give the full range of multi's
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Links please. And are these tests done with the same OS, with the same exact tweaks?


----------



## cdawall (Mar 30, 2009)

Wile E said:


> Links please. And are these tests done with the same OS, with the same exact tweaks?



no idea they were links on XS i would assume no but me and freaksavior are going to do the same tests i have a 9800GX2, 2x2600pros and he has 2xGTX285's we are going to test with. hopefully my 780a board will play nice with my phenom but if not we will run the ati cards and 9800GX2 only


----------



## Wile E (Mar 31, 2009)

cdawall said:


> no idea they were links on XS i would assume no but me and freaksavior are going to do the same tests i have a 9800GX2, 2x2600pros and he has 2xGTX285's we are going to test with. hopefully my 780a board will play nice with my phenom but if not we will run the ati cards and 9800GX2 only



That's what I want to see. The same exact card at the same exact clocks, with the same exact OS tweaks on both platforms. There's just too much left to chance doing it any other way.


----------



## cdawall (Mar 31, 2009)

Wile E said:


> That's what I want to see. The same exact card at the same exact clocks, with the same exact OS tweaks on both platforms. There's just too much left to chance doing it any other way.



i'll have XP Pro and windows 7 scores.  with max oc's on phase rofl


----------



## Kronos (Apr 1, 2009)

*Realy?*



ShadowFold said:


> The AsRock 780A does that


 Does it? I don't see any specs for that anywhere. Pls post link.


----------



## ShadowFold (Apr 1, 2009)

Kronos said:


> Does it? I don't see any specs for that anywhere. Pls post link.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6g1GtsiZ4go&feature=channel_page

They mention it later on in the video


----------



## p_o_s_pc (Apr 1, 2009)

@cdawall you want to send me the PII 955 to put it on my Nvidia 6150/430? thats what is running my 5kBE ATM and it sucks compared to the 790GX (has nothing to do with the subject i know)


----------



## jalyst (Jul 4, 2009)

BackSlash said:


> Interesting, I just want to see how this perform agains 790FX/750  and what about temps



Don't you mean against a 790GX? 
That's it's more direct competitor isn't it?


----------



## btarunr (Jul 4, 2009)

BackSlash said:


> Interesting, I just want to see how this perform agains 790FX/750  and what about temps



http://techreport.com/articles.x/17061


----------



## jalyst (Jul 4, 2009)

btarunr said:


> http://techreport.com/articles.x/17061



But this doesn't compare the 790GX to the 980a SLI...
790GX has IGP like the 980a SLI, that would be a better comparison.


----------



## btarunr (Jul 4, 2009)

They're not measuring IGP performance. 980a SLI is a high-end chipset, which can spare at least 32 PCI-E lanes for graphics cards, while 790GX only provides 16, hence this chipset compares to 790FX (which has 32 lanes to spare for graphics). The ASUS M4N82 Deluxe has the IGP permanently disabled.


----------



## jalyst (Jul 4, 2009)

okay so the 980a SLI and 790FX are the two top-notch mobo chip-sets for AMD market atm.
Do either of these have motherboard implementations which happen to also include IGP?


----------



## btarunr (Jul 4, 2009)

AMD 790FX (ATI RD790) physically lacks an IGP. NVIDIA nForce 980a has a GeForce 8300 IGP. If you want this chipset with an IGP, buy any motherboard with the nForce 780a SLI. It's the same exact chip physically.


----------



## jalyst (Jul 4, 2009)

Sorry not quite getting you...

Why would I get the 780 SLI when the 980a SLI with IGP is now available?
Is there no motherboards yet taking advatage of 980a SLI IGP?

Surely there must be some differences between 780a SLI and 980a SLI?

Why would one looking for on-board GPU (infrastructure for 2 or more x16 cards, would still be nice) choose the 980/780a SLI over the 790GX?

Which is best from CPU/Mem subsys standpoint? 
(I "may" be able to ascertain that from article you provided)

And which is best from an on-board GPU standpoint? 

Would you prefer I be posting these questions in a separate thread?

Cheers,
Jed


----------



## btarunr (Jul 4, 2009)

jalyst said:


> Sorry not quite getting you...
> 
> Why would I get the 780 SLI when the 980a SLI with IGP is now available?
> Is there no motherboards yet taking advatage of 980a SLI IGP?



They're the same thing. Just like GeForce 8800 GT -> 9800 GT. There is no motherboard that uses 980a SLI that comes with its IGP enabled. In fact, the ASUS M4N82 Deluxe is the only 980a SLI motherboard in the market. The one in the news post is the NVIDIA reference design, which we then believed someone like EVGA or Zotac would sell, sadly that didn't happen.



jalyst said:


> Surely there must be some differences between 780a SLI and 980a SLI?



There are no differences. It's a rebranding. It is basically 780a, albeit "qualified" to support AM3 CPUs. There are no 980a + DDR3 boards around, nor are there any 780a SLI boards that don't support AM3 CPUs. 



jalyst said:


> Why would one looking for on-board GPU (infrastructure for 2 or more x16 cards, would still be nice) choose the 980/780a SLI over the 790GX?



They don't. Nobody buys a >$150 motherboard over a simpler  ≤$100 one, only to end up using its IGP. If you want the IGP the 980a comes with, at a lower price, buy a motherboard with the GeForce 8300 MCP chipset instead. 



jalyst said:


> Which is best from CPU/Mem subsys standpoint?
> (I "may" be able to ascertain that from article you provided)



The chipset technically has no role to play with the memory subsystem. It's care of the IMC that's packed into the AMD CPU. 



jalyst said:


> And which is best from an on-board GPU standpoint?



Between GeForce 8300 and AMD 790GX, the 790GX is better as far as IGP performance goes. It's the fastest IGP you get for the AMD platform. 



jalyst said:


> Would you prefer I be posting these questions in a separate thread?



I have no problems answering you here. They're in line with the topic.


----------



## jalyst (Jul 4, 2009)

btarunr said:


> They're the same thing. Just like GeForce 8800 GT -> 9800 GT. There is no motherboard that uses 980a SLI that comes with its IGP enabled. In fact, the ASUS M4N82 Deluxe is the only 980a SLI motherboard in the market. The one in the news post is the NVIDIA reference design, which we then believed someone like EVGA or Zotac would sell, sadly that didn't happen.



It's only early days though... surely someone will implement a 980a SLI w/IGP?

Do these chip-sets get 'crippled' (compromised in performance) when the IGP enters the picture? E.g... 
Would the 790GX and 980/780aSLI+IGP merely have less PCI-e lines because some are used by the MGPU, or is there more to it than that?

If there is, can you detail the compromises for both platforms? Assuming there's none or the compromises have the same hit 'performance-wise'......
Which is the better performer all-round, once GPU performance advantages are 'masked'...




> There are no differences. It's a rebranding. It is basically 780a, albeit "qualified" to support AM3 CPUs. There are no 980a + DDR3 boards around, nor are there any 780a SLI boards that don't support AM3 CPUs.



OMG that's just plain bizarre....




> They don't. Nobody buys a >$150 motherboard over a simpler  ≤$100 one, only to end up using its IGP. If you want the IGP the 980a comes with, at a lower price, buy a motherboard with the GeForce 8300 MCP chipset instead.



That's precisely what I want; top-notch IGP for HTPC/PVR, but the 'potential' for top-notch workstation/gaming machine down-the-track....




> Between GeForce 8300 and AMD 790GX, the 790GX is better as far as IGP performance goes. It's the fastest IGP you get for the AMD platform.



By "GeForce 8300" you're referring to the actual on-board GPU, not the chip-set? So the 790GX's MGPU has been verified as better 'all-round', k thanks...
I wonder if AMD/ATi software is still pretty shite` in GNU/Linux? I always had less problems with nVidia....


----------



## cdawall (Jul 7, 2009)

it is not still the early days of 980A its been out what a month now. 780A is still the same exact chipset. GF8300 should be pretty close HD3300 in everything


----------



## jalyst (Jul 7, 2009)

Yeah I've been filled in a little more here, excellent forum, very well informed answers!
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1160285

btarunr, some of my questions remain unanswered...
It'd be really appreciated if you could address them, but I understand if you grow weary  ;-)

all the best


----------



## btarunr (Jul 7, 2009)

jalyst said:


> It's only early days though... surely someone will implement a 980a SLI w/IGP?



It's already there like I said, you have a number of 780a SLI boards that have the IGP available, and these motherboards support every AM2/2+/3 processor you can think of. So there's no point in waiting for a 980a with IGP. 



jalyst said:


> Do these chip-sets get 'crippled' (compromised in performance) when the IGP enters the picture? E.g...
> Would the 790GX and 980/780aSLI+IGP merely have less PCI-e lines because some are used by the MGPU, or is there more to it than that?
> 
> if there is, can you detail the compromises for both platforms? Assuming there's none or the compromises have the same hit 'performance-wise'......
> Which is the better performer all-round, once GPU performance advantages are 'masked'..



Reduced number of PCI-E lanes don't necessarily cripple the IGPs. These IGPs don't need an x16 link to work to their full-potential, not even x8 for that matter.



jalyst said:


> OMG that's just plain bizarre....



But true, and NVIDIA is good at doing it. Rebranding worked very well in selling GeForce 9800 GT and GeForce GTS 250. 




jalyst said:


> That's precisely what I want; top-notch IGP for HTPC/PVR, but the 'potential' for top-notch workstation/gaming machine down-the-track....
> 
> By "GeForce 8300" you're referring to the actual on-board GPU, not the chip-set? So the 790GX's MGPU has been verified as better 'all-round', k thanks...
> I wonder if AMD/ATi software is still pretty shite` in GNU/Linux? I always had less problems with nVidia....



I'm talking about GeForce 8300 MCP (the chipset), not GeForce 8300 (the IGP). NVIDIA chooses to call it an "mGPU", which abbreviates "motherboard GPU", not "mobile GPU". It's a monolithic chipset. If you don't need to use discrete graphics, you don't need a 780a SLI or 980a SLI. This chipset packs the same IGP.

With Linux, I recommend sticking to NVIDIA. Their Linux driver support is outstanding. A slightly faster IGP won't mean much in Linux anyway.


----------



## jalyst (Jul 7, 2009)

btarunr said:


> It's already there like I said, you have a number of 780a SLI boards that have the IGP available, and these motherboards support every AM2/2+/3 processor you can think of. So there's no point in waiting for a 980a with IGP.



Understood, if it's purely a certification and the IGP/non-IGP features are the same, why wait!




> Reduced number of PCI-E lanes don't necessarily cripple the IGPs. These IGPs don't need an x16 link to work to their full-potential, not even x8 for that matter.



No I was wondering if IGP implementations of these chip-sets are different to non-IGP implementations in areas other than graphics.




> I'm talking about GeForce 8300 MCP (the chipset), not GeForce 8300 (the IGP). NVIDIA chooses to call it an "mGPU", which abbreviates "motherboard GPU", not "mobile GPU". It's a monolithic chipset. If you don't need to use discrete graphics, you don't need a 780a SLI or 980a SLI. This chipset packs the same IGP.



No I may need discrete graphics at some point, but thanks for the suggestion.




> With Linux, I recommend sticking to NVIDIA. Their Linux driver support is outstanding. A slightly faster IGP won't mean much in Linux anyway.



Interesting to note, thanks


----------



## btarunr (Jul 7, 2009)

jalyst said:


> No I was wondering if IGP implementations of these chip-sets are different in non-IGP implementations in areas other than graphics.



They're not, as far as their feature-sets go. Whatever differences that may exist, may be brought in by the motherboard manufacturer. Not a big deal.



jalyst said:


> No I may need discrete graphics at some point, but thanks for the suggestion.



And GeForce 8300 also offers you a PCI-E x16 slot just for that.


----------



## jalyst (Jul 7, 2009)

Oh you mean their chip-sets that offer IGP (mGPU's), yeah they're the only ones I'm looking at now...
But don't their range of mGPU's have most of the same features as their range of MCP's? (except for the SLI etc)
I hope so.....


----------



## btarunr (Jul 7, 2009)

jalyst said:


> Oh you mean their chip-sets that offer IGP (mGPU's), yeah they're the only ones I'm looking at now...
> But don't their range of mGPU's have most of the same features as their range of MCP's? (except for the SLI etc)
> I hope so.....



Yes, they're physically the same chip. It's codenamed MCP72, and is implemented in different ways to draw out different SKUs. Hope this gives you an idea:







Do you see the genius of the design from a business standpoint? The rest of the feature-set is nearly the same. MCP82 claims to have an NVIDIA-labeled version of the Advanced Clock Calibration feature, though physically, the MCP has nothing extra added to enable the feature.


----------



## Wile E (Jul 7, 2009)

btarunr said:


> It's already there like I said, you have a number of 780a SLI boards that have the IGP available, and these motherboards support every AM2/2+/3 processor you can think of. So there's no point in waiting for a 980a with IGP.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



ATI works well in Linux these days as well. It's not like the old days. Support for ATI has grown in leaps and bounds over the past 2 years.


----------



## jalyst (Jul 10, 2009)

btarunr said:


> Yes, they're physically the same chip. It's codenamed MCP72, and is implemented in different ways to draw out different SKUs. Hope this gives you an idea:
> 
> http://img.techpowerup.org/090707/bta128.png
> 
> Do you see the genius of the design from a business standpoint? The rest of the feature-set is nearly the same. MCP82 claims to have an NVIDIA-labeled version of the Advanced Clock Calibration feature, though physically, the MCP has nothing extra added to enable the feature.



Oh this fully clears things up now thanks!

I wonder if the AMD chip-sets compare well feature-set wise to the 780a? 
i.e. Do they have the same sort of bridge chip allowing for a lot more expandability with discrete cards, among other MCP features...

It looks like they'll have even more of an edge with the IGP soon now... 
http://www.techpowerup.com/98801/AMD_RS880_IGP_15_Percent_Faster.html
But I'm not so sure about other areas...


----------



## btarunr (Jul 10, 2009)

Yes, the 790FX does. It doesn't have an IGP, and you wouldn't need one anyway.


----------



## jalyst (Jul 10, 2009)

So the 780A and 790FX are a close match, except that the FX never has motherboards implemented with IGP whereas the 780A sometimes does.
That rules out the FX then because I want IGP from the outset, plus 780A is avail as 790I which support Intel 775, which gives it a slight edge again in-terms of CPU performance.


----------



## btarunr (Jul 10, 2009)

nForce 750/780/790 Intel series chipset has no IGP.

And I don't see how 780a SLI has "a slight edge again in-terms of CPU performance" because 790i supports Intel 775. That's a completely different chipset.


----------



## jalyst (Jul 10, 2009)

btarunr said:


> nForce 750/780/790 Intel series chipset has no IGP.
> 
> And I don't see how 780a SLI has "a slight edge again in-terms of CPU performance" because 790i supports Intel 775. That's a completely different chipset.



I thought the Intel series is more or less the same as the AMD series aside from the CPU micro-architecture they support, & hence there are mobo's available with IGP. 
I thought this had been previously mentioned, sorry, my mistake...


----------

