Upgrading want Advice

Want a 939 board unsure of brand yet. Appropriate CPU and ram. Used to run
Intel 2.8, so I am looking at that level or higher. Do I understand that the
N350 boards are being replaced with N4 boards?

Differences?

newsreader wrote:

Want a 939 board unsure of brand yet. Appropriate CPU and ram. Used to run
Intel 2.8, so I am looking at that level or higher. Do I understand that the
N350 boards are being replaced with N4 boards?

Differences?



Yes. The N4 boards are supposed to be available later this month and
their primary new feature is PCI-Express video. They also incorporate
the next iteration of SATA, 3.0GB.

There are supposed to be boards with Via, SiS, and ATI chipsets out soon
for the AMD64 that at least include the PCI-Express video slot.

I currently use the Asus A8V and I'm very happy with it. You are at a
crossroads so to speak. N4 boards are more the future but will require a
PCIe video card. If you are happy with your current card, the A8V might be
the way to go. Of course, the N4 from Asus is quite a mb that also features
SLI using 2 PCIe vid cards (but that's a lot of dough).
"Dee" wrote in message
news
newsreader wrote:

Want a 939 board unsure of brand yet. Appropriate CPU and ram. Used to
run
Intel 2.8, so I am looking at that level or higher. Do I understand that
the
N350 boards are being replaced with N4 boards?

Differences?



Yes. The N4 boards are supposed to be available later this month and
their primary new feature is PCI-Express video. They also incorporate the
next iteration of SATA, 3.0GB.

There are supposed to be boards with Via, SiS, and ATI chipsets out soon
for the AMD64 that at least include the PCI-Express video slot.

Yes. The N4 boards are supposed to be available later this month and
their primary new feature is PCI-Express video. They also incorporate
the next iteration of SATA, 3.0GB.

Whoa, it went from 150MB/sec to 3000MB/sec? Or should that be 300?

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 07:42:11 -0500, Dee wrote:

..
Yes. The N4 boards are supposed to be available later this month and
their primary new feature is PCI-Express video. They also incorporate
the next iteration of SATA, 3.0GB.


I hope they finally come out with real SATA Hard Drives for it

All those marvel chips crack me up.

Hey kids, be the first on your block to get a PATA drive with a
decelerator chip in board.

humbug wrote:
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 07:42:11 -0500, Dee wrote:


..
Yes. The N4 boards are supposed to be available later this month and
their primary new feature is PCI-Express video. They also incorporate
the next iteration of SATA, 3.0GB.



I hope they finally come out with real SATA Hard Drives for it

All those marvel chips crack me up.

Hey kids, be the first on your block to get a PATA drive with a
decelerator chip in board.


You definitely sound confused and/or ignorant! What makes you think
that a SATA drive is a "decelerated" PATA/EIDE drive?

On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 12:37:23 -0500, Dee wrote:

humbug wrote:
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 07:42:11 -0500, Dee wrote:


..
Yes. The N4 boards are supposed to be available later this month and
their primary new feature is PCI-Express video. They also incorporate
the next iteration of SATA, 3.0GB.



I hope they finally come out with real SATA Hard Drives for it

All those marvel chips crack me up.

Hey kids, be the first on your block to get a PATA drive with a
decelerator chip in board.


You definitely sound confused and/or ignorant! What makes you think
that a SATA drive is a "decelerated" PATA/EIDE drive?


LOL.

Figure it out.

You think they're dropping the beta for nothing ?

humbug wrote:
On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 12:37:23 -0500, Dee wrote:


humbug wrote:

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 07:42:11 -0500, Dee wrote:



..
Yes. The N4 boards are supposed to be available later this month and
their primary new feature is PCI-Express video. They also incorporate
the next iteration of SATA, 3.0GB.



I hope they finally come out with real SATA Hard Drives for it

All those marvel chips crack me up.

Hey kids, be the first on your block to get a PATA drive with a
decelerator chip in board.


You definitely sound confused and/or ignorant! What makes you think
that a SATA drive is a "decelerated" PATA/EIDE drive?



LOL.

Figure it out.

You think they're dropping the beta for nothing ?



Well, if you think you're so smart, then why are there 10K rpm SATA
drives and not PATA/EIDE? Last time I checked 10K was a bit faster than
7.5K. And the first iteration of the SATA specs are not Beta! It was
announced when they started work on the specs that they would increase
over time. So, obviously you are not only confused, but in the dark!!!

On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 20:32:53 -0700, Yeremein wrote:

Yes. The N4 boards are supposed to be available later this month and
their primary new feature is PCI-Express video. They also incorporate
the next iteration of SATA, 3.0GB.

Whoa, it went from 150MB/sec to 3000MB/sec? Or should that be 300?

It's 300, not that it matters. The actual transfer speed is around
60MB/second. The advantage of SATA-2 is the inclusion of Native Command
Queuing (NCQ) not the faster bus speed. NCQ allows the disk to handle
multiple requests at the same time, and more importantly reorder those
requests to minimize head movement. Imagine a situation where you have
three files, two on the outer edge and one on the inner edge of the
platter, call those file A,B and C. Suppose the OS requests those files in
the order A, C, B. In a PATA or SATA I drive the heads would have to move
to the outer edge, then to the inner edge and then back to the outer edge.
Potentially having to traverse the entire width of the platter three
times. In an SATA II drive (or a SCSI drive) the controller would look at
the position of the head, move it to the closest file and then move to the
next nearest file and so forth. If the head were sitting in the middle of
the platter when the first request was received the total head movement
would be only 1.5 crossings of the platter as opposed to three. If the
head were already on one edge then it would only have to cross the platter
once. So the head movement is reduced by a factor of 2 to 3 in this
example. In a file server with lots of disk accesses this is a huge
advantage. In a desktop you are unlikely to see any difference at all
because desktop systems usually only fetch one file at a time and most of
the time they aren't doing anything at all.

Well, if you think you're so smart, then why are there 10K rpm SATA drives
and not PATA/EIDE? Last time I checked 10K was a bit faster than 7.5K.
And the first iteration of the SATA specs are not Beta! It was announced
when they started work on the specs that they would increase over time.
So, obviously you are not only confused, but in the dark!!!

Raptors?

Anyone?