CrossFire Xpress 3200: RD580 for AM2
by Wesley Fink on June 1, 2006 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Test Setup
| Performance Test Configuration - ATI CrossFire Xpress 3200 AM2 | |
| Processor: | AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ (AM2) (2.4GHz, 1MB Cache per core) |
| RAM: | 2 x 1GB Corsair Twin2x2048-8500C5 DDR2-800 at (CL3-3-3-13 2T) |
| Hard Drive(s): | 1 x Hitachi 250GB SATA2 enabled (8MB Buffer) |
| System Platform Drivers: | None - LAN, Audio, SMBus drivers as required |
| Video Cards: | 1 x ATI X1900XT - All Standard Tests 1 x EVGA 7900GTX - All Standard Tests 2 x ATI x1900XT (Master+Standard) - CrossFire |
| Video Drivers: | ATI Catalyst 6.4 |
| Cooling: | AMD FX62 Heatpipe AM2 Cooler |
| Power Supply: | OCZ PowerStream 520W |
| Operating System(s): | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
| Performance Test Configuration - Foxconn C51XEM2AA | |
| Processor: | AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ (AM2) (2.4GHz, 1MB Cache per core) |
| RAM: | 2 x 1GB Corsair Twin2x2048-8500C5 DDR2-800 at (CL3-3-3-13 2T) |
| Hard Drive(s): | 1 x Maxtor 300GB SATA2 (16MB Buffer) |
| System Platform Drivers: | NVIDIA 9.34 |
| Video Cards: | 1 x EVGA 7900GTX - All Tests 2 x EVGA 7900GTX for SLI Tests |
| Video Drivers: | NVIDIA 91.27 |
| Cooling: | Zalman CNPS9500 AM2 |
| Power Supply: | OCZ GameXStream 700W |
| Operating System(s): | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
| Performance Test Configuration - Asus A8N32-SLI Deluxe | |
| Processor: | AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ (S939) (2.4GHz, 1MB Cache per core) |
| RAM: | 2 x 1GB Crucial DDR500 at DDR-400 2-2-2-7 1T |
| Hard Drive(s): | 1 x Hitachi 250GB SATA2 enabled (8MB Buffer) |
| System Platform Drivers: | NVIDIA 6.85 |
| Video Cards: | 1 x EVGA 7900GTX - All Tests 2 x EVGA 7900GTX for SLI Tests |
| Video Drivers: | NVIDIA 84.21 |
| Cooling: | AMD FX-60 Heatpipe Cooler |
| Power Supply: | OCZ PowerStream 520W |
| Operating System(s): | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
To the extent possible, test conditions were maintained the same over the platforms tested. For better comparison standard test results (1280x1024) were run with both the ATI X1900 XT and the NVIDIA 7900 GTX. Since SLI and CrossFire are not yet interchangeable, 1600x1200 4xAA/8xAF single and SLI were run on the NVIDIA-based boards with 7900 GTX. 1600X1200 4xAA/8xAF were run on the ATI using an X1900 XT and X1900 CrossFire. All results are reported in our charts and color-coded for easier identification of results.
AM2 benchmarking used Corsair PC-8500 (DDR2-1066) 2GB kit at 3-3-3-13 timings at 2.2V. DDR benchmarks used a Crucial 2GB kit at the fastest available DDR400 2-2-2-7 timings. In recent months the memory market has moved from a 1GB kit to a 2BG kit being the common memory configuration. Our new DDR2 test standard will therefore be 2GB and we used the 2GB DDR memory for best comparison.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
71 Comments
View All Comments
LoneWolf15 - Thursday, June 1, 2006 - link
Not that anyone will necessarily do so, but will RD580 support the building of Socket 939 boards as well?JarredWalton - Thursday, June 1, 2006 - link
RD580 socket 939 boards have already been made -- well, at least one of them has been made. http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2752">DFI CFX3200-DR It is doubtful that we will see many more socket 939 boards using the chipset, since AM2 is basically going to replace socket 939 as fast as AMD can make it happen.LoneWolf15 - Thursday, June 1, 2006 - link
On Page 1, the table for the RD580 shows (8) SATA2 ports and dual-gig ethernet. The board specs on page two on the other hand, show 4 SATA2 ports, and single gig ethernet, but only if a PHY (i.e., Marvel or someone else) is used.Apparently ATI has added 4 additional SATA ports via Silicon image on the reference board; but I don't call that a feature of RD580. What am I missing here? The table on page 1 seems to contradict what is listed on page 2.
Wesley Fink - Thursday, June 1, 2006 - link
We agree with you. The chipset has 4 SATA2 ports and the extra 4 ports come from 3132 Silicon Image controllers. I will try to edit the image.LoneWolf15 - Friday, June 2, 2006 - link
Thanks. Also, what about FireWire? I think your article said that neither nVidia nor ATI has native Firewire (additional VIA/other vendor chipset required), but RD480 and RD580 are listed on your opening table as having 1/2 Firewire ports respectively.Stele - Friday, June 2, 2006 - link
I think the opening table is just a platform chart that divides the target markets of each chipset. On the first column is the target price range of a certain motherboard range. The second column identifies which chipset is meant to cover that particular range. The third column then explains the primary target market for that particular range. Lastly the right-most column briefly describes the features such a motherboard in that particular range should have.Wesley Fink - Friday, June 2, 2006 - link
You are correct, Stele. With that said I now think a better way to handle this and remove confusion is to go back to the original chart and clarify that this is recommendations in the text. Thanks.Stele - Friday, June 2, 2006 - link
Oh you're welcome. Looks like our replies to him were posted at the same time :PYes I think that's a great idea, otherwise after all the editing you're not going to have very much on that chart anymore! Soon we'll have people saying "$250 for a chipset? Then what's the motherboard going to cost??" ;)
Wesley Fink - Friday, June 2, 2006 - link
The feature chart is from ATI literature and was a listing of recommended configurations for various market segments. I have changed the SATA and Gigabit LAN and will remove the Firewire, since it is not chipset specific for either nVidia or ATI. There is an excellent VIA Firewire controller on the Reference board, though we would rather see Firewire 800 which is very fast but disappearing from new board introductions.Stele - Friday, June 2, 2006 - link
Probably because of
1) poor OS support - even Microsoft noted that Vista would not support 1394b at launch
2) poor device support - the majority of appliances and peripherals seem to be quite happy at 1394a with no signs of an imminent and/or major switchover to 1394b
so motherboard manufacturers probably thought "what the heck" and decided to keep costs low for now by sticking to the 1394a controllers, which are likely cheaper than their 1394b counterparts. Furthermore, the 1394a solutions are tried and tested, hence they also avoid unpleasant design surprises that may require time and effort to redesign around... resources which could be better used elsewhere for now.