Abit NF7-S vs Asus A7N8X Deluxe

  • Thread starter Thread starter Joe Blobbs
  • Start date Start date
J

Joe Blobbs

I'm looking at upgrading very soon. Can someone tell me how the Abit
NF7-S compares with the Asus A7N8X Deluxe? They look fairly similar
to me.

- Joe
 
I'm looking at upgrading very soon. Can someone tell me how the Abit
NF7-S compares with the Asus A7N8X Deluxe? They look fairly similar
to me.
Click to expand...

well... I got the Asus for my parents, and I got the Abit for me.
 
I'm looking at the same motherboards. The nvidia site gives
some explanations of the various permutations of their
chipsets and has comparison charts of various motherboards.

On the nvidia chart:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/motherboards.html
the abit NF7-S is said to have a 333 MHz FSB. Abit's
page on the board says only the 2.0 version has 400 MHz
FSB. So, you're starting out looking at an issue of
specific board versions. The Asus board goes to 400 MHz
FSB.

I have a question I haven't gotten a satisfactory answer
for. The crucial.com site has a faq on memory that states
that PC2700 memory was made for processors with a 333 MHz
FSB. However, the nvidia site and the motherboard makers
imply that PC3200 (400 MHz DDR) works at its rated speed
with the 333MHz FSB processors. Which is it? How much
performance advantage would one ACTUALLY achieve by getting
PC3200 memory for a 333 MHz FSB Barton processor instead
of PC2700? I talked with a tech at Crucial who essentially
had no good answer because he had been unaware that you
could actually have a 333 MHz FSB and still communicate
with DDR400 memory at rated speed.

Don
 
I have a question I haven't gotten a satisfactory answer
for. The crucial.com site has a faq on memory that states
that PC2700 memory was made for processors with a 333 MHz
FSB. However, the nvidia site and the motherboard makers
imply that PC3200 (400 MHz DDR) works at its rated speed
with the 333MHz FSB processors. Which is it?
Click to expand...

BOTH. In order to get the best performance out of your system (ie max out
benchmarks), your memory must be matched with your CPU FSB. Thus, 333MHz
RAM is a good match for a processor with FSB of 333. But there's no reason
you can't use 400MHz RAM with a 333MHz processor. The motherboard *should*
be able to run the CPU and RAM asynchronously. Failing that, 400MHz RAM
should be ultra stable if it is under-clocked at 333MHz.

Ironically, if you run 400MHz RAM at 400MHz with a 333MHz FSB processor,
your benchmark results will be lower than 333/333. But in real-world
performance, you probably won't notice a difference.

Bottom line . . . if your FSB is 333, your RAM should be 333 for best
performance, but doesn't have to be 333. Heck, if the motherboard will
support it, you can use 266 RAM, also. -Dave
 
I'm looking at the same motherboards. The nvidia site gives
some explanations of the various permutations of their
chipsets and has comparison charts of various motherboards.

On the nvidia chart:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/motherboards.html
the abit NF7-S is said to have a 333 MHz FSB. Abit's
page on the board says only the 2.0 version has 400 MHz
FSB. So, you're starting out looking at an issue of
specific board versions. The Asus board goes to 400 MHz
FSB.

I have a question I haven't gotten a satisfactory answer
for. The crucial.com site has a faq on memory that states
that PC2700 memory was made for processors with a 333 MHz
FSB. However, the nvidia site and the motherboard makers
imply that PC3200 (400 MHz DDR) works at its rated speed
with the 333MHz FSB processors. Which is it? How much
performance advantage would one ACTUALLY achieve by getting
PC3200 memory for a 333 MHz FSB Barton processor instead
of PC2700? I talked with a tech at Crucial who essentially
had no good answer because he had been unaware that you
could actually have a 333 MHz FSB and still communicate
with DDR400 memory at rated speed.
Click to expand...

This really isn't much of a mystery.
The FSB connects the CPU to dangs, like the NorthBridge memory
controller.
The MemoryBus connects the NorthBridge to Memory.

The speeds do not have to match up. But if max speeds are close, there
appears to be some performance gain by running them in sync. Like
backing down PC3200 to DDR333 on a 333FSB.
My guess is that if max speeds differ much, and particularly if FSB is
higher than ram, you'd be better off running asynchronous.

If you're running DDRAM at reduced speed, You should IMO try running
at more aggressive settings. Try reducing CAS latency from 2.5 to 2
(assuming you have CL2.5 memory). (By all means DO get your system
together and running with standard settings before fiddling with it!)

BTW, The FSB architecture is gone from AMDs K8 cpus. AMD will phase
out socket A. Rumours indicate that Bartons successor will be on
socket 754. (and indeed, 754 will be AMDs big standard already now in
2004) I don't know how this will impact on your plans, just thought
I'd mention it. Personally, I never worry about this, since I gave up
on the idea of upgrading just the cpu, without changing mobo, years
ago. In practise, it never works out as being worthwhile.
 
Thanks for the reply.

I ran across an article in Tom's Hardware that provides
some nice detail about memory tweaking.

I agree with the concept that it usually works out to be better
to upgrade the whole kit and kaboodle when upgrading. These days
the price/performance breakpoint looks like it is right around
the Athlon XP 2500+ or 2600+, Barton core, 333MHz FSB. Going faster
than that gets more expensive quicker than speed is enhanced. I'm not
a gamer so the issue is latency for various operations.
Going from 25 seconds with my present setup to 2.5 seconds is a bigger
advantage than going from 2.5 seconds to 1.7 seconds. The first
is worth $250-300, the second isn't worth an additional $300 to me.
 
Back
Top