PDA

View Full Version : What's faster?

PWatterson
08-07-07, 04:50 PM
To make a long story short, I ended up with a motherboard (this one (http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/Products/Motherboard/Products_Overview.aspx?ProductID=1673&ModelName=GA-7N400-L)) that does not support SATA, but has some room to overclock (the BIOS is rather limited though...) Right now, I have a motherboard (this one (http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/Products/Motherboard/Products_Overview.aspx?ProductID=1786&ModelName=7VT600P-RZ)) that supports SATA, but does not overclock at all.

Will SATA make that big of a difference?

Edit: I think I may have just answered my own question, but the newly acquired motherboard supports dual channel, while my old one does not. Am I right in saying that it would be ok to sacrifice SATA for dual channel capability?
SeasonalEclipse
08-07-07, 04:56 PM
actually dual channel on socket a is basically.. useless. the chips cant use that much bandwith.
dudleycpa
08-07-07, 04:57 PM
Dual Channel should give you much better performance than Sata vs IDE.

It shouldn't be close.
UglyChild
08-07-07, 05:18 PM
actually dual channel on socket a is basically.. useless. the chips cant use that much bandwith.


agreed. go with the SATA.
PWatterson
08-07-07, 05:47 PM
agreed. go with the SATA.


Even though I can overclock a bit on the non-SATA board?

Non-Sata has Nforce2

Sata has via600 or w/e.
ToeKneeATX
08-07-07, 05:59 PM
i say stay with the eide board. sata would be faster but i dont think it would be astoundingly faster. going from 133 to 150 is not really that much of a difference, unless you are doing alot of sustained data transfers i would stay with the other board for the reasons you have stated already.
tuskenraider
08-07-07, 07:29 PM
OC'ing and dual channel is worth more the SATA over IDE any day.
JamesXP
08-07-07, 07:32 PM
SATA IS IDE.

PATA = Parrelell ATA
SATA = Serial ATA.


:D
Quailane
08-07-07, 07:39 PM
SATA IS IDE.

Not according to the marketing departments of every manufacturer.

Anyway, NF2 is leaps and bounds ahead of any VIA chipset on the good ol' trusty socket A.
tuskenraider
08-07-07, 08:32 PM
SATA IS IDE.

PATA = Parrelell ATA
SATA = Serial ATA.


:DWhen I want to feel smart I'll correct someone that calls SATA 3.0Gb/s, SATAII. :rolleyes: Lots of opportunities for that..........but I still understand what they're saying.
JamesXP
08-07-07, 09:52 PM
Just statin' a point :thup:
shadowdr
08-08-07, 06:32 AM
Go with the NF2 over the Via. The dual channel memory will more then make up for the lack of sata support. Sata or pata will not be able to use the available bandwidth of either mobo unless you are going to run Raptors in raid0.
Murdochs_mad
08-08-07, 12:49 PM
I had a GB 7N400-L, got the 7N400 pro2 (rev1) now and when I'm in the bios I push ctrl+F1 and it unlocks more options I can't remember whether it worked on the L but worth a try, also I never got the L to overclock at all, didn't get much out of my pro2 either.

2281mhz (15x 152mhz) stable for 4 months but very hot, got 2405mhz (18x133) stable long enough to save a screen shot of cpuz:) (dunno how I got 18x multi the chip isn't unlocked) on top system in sig.
PWatterson
08-08-07, 02:20 PM
I had a GB 7N400-L, got the 7N400 pro2 (rev1) now and when I'm in the bios I push ctrl+F1 and it unlocks more options I can't remember whether it worked on the L but worth a try, also I never got the L to overclock at all, didn't get much out of my pro2 either.

2281mhz (15x 152mhz) stable for 4 months but very hot, got 2405mhz (18x133) stable long enough to save a screen shot of cpuz:) (dunno how I got 18x multi the chip isn't unlocked) on top system in sig.


Ctrl and f1 worked beautifully! I have some more overclocking options now. Thanks!