What motherboards are based on Intel 915 and Intel 945 chipsets

wrote:
The boards in question are bt878 video capture cards used for multi
channel DVR capture. The vendors of the cards prefer Intel because in
their experience they have fewer reported problems with them.

Just because some people prefer, or even need to stick to products by
the dominant players in the PC business doesn't make them trolls.
Remember that no one ever got fired for going with IBM, Microsoft or
Intel.

Your apparent prejudices against the major industry players, probably
on account of their business practices are of no consequence to 99% of
computer users out there.

If you know of any non-Intel Pentium chipsets or AMD chipsets which are
known to work well with PV149 or Kodicom series DVR cards I'll be glad
to know.

PS. I'll be grateful if you don't take this thread off topic

Hi, I'd like to apologize for the rather uncouth and tangential
denizens of this NG.

Following your MFG's recommendation is definitely the smart way to go,
and I'd encourage you to ignore the blather you've heard. Although if
you want to try an AMD system, I'd ask the tech guys at Kodicom...

That being said, there's several things you should think about:

1. Is 1 PCI bus enough?

I suspect that if you are using 5 capture cards, you might want to try
and get something with multiple PCI busses. PCI does not give you much
bandwidth, only 133MB/s, which may not be enough for 5 cards to all
operate simultaneously.

2. Does your storage system have enough bandwidth?

You may get away with a couple of hard drives, if they are newer SATA
ones, but I have a hard time seeing a single HD being able to satisfy 5
video capture cards (unless you stick them on a single PCI bus, where
there's not that much bandwidth anyway).

3. How much memory do you need?

Video capture definitely uses up memory like there's no tomorrow.

4. How many processors do you need?

Gotta move that data around somehow...

It would really suck to find out that the wonderful system you've built
runs slowly because of any of those 4 issues.

That being said here's a list of motherboards (many of them from
Intel):

http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/artic...,114620,00.asp

Two of the top ones have 5 PCI slots and work with Intel CPUs, some of
the other top ones have 5 PCI slots but are AMD boards. I would
strongly recommend both Intel and Nvidia's chipsets, they seem to be
pretty good.

The nforce4 chipset is relatively modern and supports up to 6 PCI
slots, so perhaps you can find a motherboard with 5 PCI slots that is
relatively new...

DK

DK

On 28 Mar 2006 02:16:47 -0800, "David Kanter" wrote:


wrote:
The boards in question are bt878 video capture cards used for multi
channel DVR capture. The vendors of the cards prefer Intel because in
their experience they have fewer reported problems with them.

Just because some people prefer, or even need to stick to products by
the dominant players in the PC business doesn't make them trolls.
Remember that no one ever got fired for going with IBM, Microsoft or
Intel.

Your apparent prejudices against the major industry players, probably
on account of their business practices are of no consequence to 99% of
computer users out there.

If you know of any non-Intel Pentium chipsets or AMD chipsets which are
known to work well with PV149 or Kodicom series DVR cards I'll be glad
to know.

PS. I'll be grateful if you don't take this thread off topic

Hi, I'd like to apologize for the rather uncouth and tangential
denizens of this NG.

Now you're acting the presumptious prick. Apologize for yourself - there's
nothing tangential here. If you think the err, denizens" here are uncouth
you have the choice to not come here - we are not going away and we are not
changing our expressed opinions to fit some hysterical Intel agenda.

Following your MFG's recommendation is definitely the smart way to go,
and I'd encourage you to ignore the blather you've heard. Although if
you want to try an AMD system, I'd ask the tech guys at Kodicom...

If he already has it, that may be a course of action - doesn't excuse the
incompetence/laziness of his mfr - personally I'd stay away from them.

That being said, there's several things you should think about:

1. Is 1 PCI bus enough?

I suspect that if you are using 5 capture cards, you might want to try
and get something with multiple PCI busses. PCI does not give you much
bandwidth, only 133MB/s, which may not be enough for 5 cards to all
operate simultaneously.

2. Does your storage system have enough bandwidth?

You may get away with a couple of hard drives, if they are newer SATA
ones, but I have a hard time seeing a single HD being able to satisfy 5
video capture cards (unless you stick them on a single PCI bus, where
there's not that much bandwidth anyway).

3. How much memory do you need?

Video capture definitely uses up memory like there's no tomorrow.

4. How many processors do you need?

Gotta move that data around somehow...

It would really suck to find out that the wonderful system you've built
runs slowly because of any of those 4 issues.

That being said here's a list of motherboards (many of them from
Intel):

http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/artic...,114620,00.asp

Two of the top ones have 5 PCI slots and work with Intel CPUs, some of
the other top ones have 5 PCI slots but are AMD boards. I would
strongly recommend both Intel and Nvidia's chipsets, they seem to be
pretty good.

The nforce4 chipset is relatively modern and supports up to 6 PCI
slots, so perhaps you can find a motherboard with 5 PCI slots that is
relatively new...

Gaaaak - nForce4 chipset? Do you know anything about it at all? Why in
the hell would you even mention it in the light of the evidence? Had it
not crossed your mind that what you're saying now is that an nForce4 is
gonna be OK as long as it's connected to an Intel CPU?... absurd!

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

On 28 Mar 2006 13:39:31 -0800, "David Kanter"
wrote:

It could be that for whatever weird reason their products just work
better or more reliably on Intel chipsets, compared to some of the
alternatives. It could also be that the MFG doesn't want to spend the
money to qualify another platform, which is entirely fair. It also
could be that when the product was designed that AMD wasn't really a
credible supplier and therefore was ignored (which if it was back
around Northwood, I can understand), and they simply don't have the
money to redo qualification.

The Intel-only recommendation is pretty common with high-end
multi-channel DVR boards, which is a relatively small marketplace
mostly dependent on networks of authorized dealers, and the tribal
wisdom that accompanies such models.

Here's an example of a typical hardware recommendation page for the
Geovision line of cards, which is one of the industry standards:
http://www.remote-security.com/gvrequirements.htm
"Must use Intel chip set motherboards on ALL models. The motherboard
can be Intel, ASUS, Gigabyte. The CPU can be AMD or Intel."

Yes, I'm aware that AMD CPUs don't run on Intel chipsets these days.
I didn't write the FAQ, just presented it as a typical example.

I believe it's because PC-based multi-channel DVR systems can be
tricky at the best of times, requiring a lot of PC resources, as you
pointed out. Reliability and stability is critically important on
these systems, and many just stick with the manufacturer's
recommendations to minimize the risk of problems and help with
technical support.

I maintain a network of stand-alone security DVRs, which cost more for
less capability, because they're far more stable than PC based ones.

Regardless, the OP came with a pretty specific and valid question, and
got a very rude response, including being accused of trolling, when
his post was clearly not a troll.

Possibly the AMD fans can take it up with DVR board manufacturers and
security system vendors and get them to change their minds, rather
than beating up on the customers attempting to follow the vendor
recommendations.

max

On 28 Mar 2006 13:39:31 -0800, "David Kanter" wrote:

Now you're acting the presumptious prick. Apologize for yourself - there's
nothing tangential here. If you think the err, denizens" here are uncouth
you have the choice to not come here - we are not going away and we are not
changing our expressed opinions to fit some hysterical Intel agenda.

I wasn't necessarily singling you, but clearly you feel attacked. My
goal is to get advice and facts to the gentleman asking the question.
I got the impression this was a corporate purchase, and while some
individuals and some rather knowledgeable folks may feel comfortable
ignoring manufacturer recommendations, most don't. Certainly in a lot
of cases, if you do have a problem with a abnormal configuration, if
you aren't a large enough account, you get told "sorry we don't support
that". Things like that get IT guys fired.

Attacked - no but don't apologize for others behavior - it comes across as
supreme arrogance. I think we all know all the pros & cons here -- we've
been over these subjects here umpteen times long before you appeared here
-- no need to windbag them.

Following your MFG's recommendation is definitely the smart way to go,
and I'd encourage you to ignore the blather you've heard. Although if
you want to try an AMD system, I'd ask the tech guys at Kodicom...

If he already has it, that may be a course of action - doesn't excuse the
incompetence/laziness of his mfr - personally I'd stay away from them.

It could be that for whatever weird reason their products just work
better or more reliably on Intel chipsets, compared to some of the
alternatives. It could also be that the MFG doesn't want to spend the
money to qualify another platform, which is entirely fair. It also
could be that when the product was designed that AMD wasn't really a
credible supplier and therefore was ignored (which if it was back
around Northwood, I can understand), and they simply don't have the
money to redo qualification.

Just what is it about "back around Northwood)" which you could understand
as "credible"? That would include Athlon XPs and nForce2, which is a good
chipset and a years worth of AMD64. If he was trying to do a "corporate"
purchase and is short of funds to do the proper research he should have
said so. As for "platform" any suggestion that Intel has not had (new)
incompatibilities and problems with new generations of chipsets is bogus or
ignorance of the facts.

As for "qualification" if a card mfr won't do it, I'd be looking at a more
umm, credible mfr.

That being said, there's several things you should think about:

1. Is 1 PCI bus enough?

I suspect that if you are using 5 capture cards, you might want to try
and get something with multiple PCI busses. PCI does not give you much
bandwidth, only 133MB/s, which may not be enough for 5 cards to all
operate simultaneously.

2. Does your storage system have enough bandwidth?

You may get away with a couple of hard drives, if they are newer SATA
ones, but I have a hard time seeing a single HD being able to satisfy 5
video capture cards (unless you stick them on a single PCI bus, where
there's not that much bandwidth anyway).

3. How much memory do you need?

Video capture definitely uses up memory like there's no tomorrow.

4. How many processors do you need?

Gotta move that data around somehow...

It would really suck to find out that the wonderful system you've built
runs slowly because of any of those 4 issues.

That being said here's a list of motherboards (many of them from
Intel):

http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/artic...,114620,00.asp

Two of the top ones have 5 PCI slots and work with Intel CPUs, some of
the other top ones have 5 PCI slots but are AMD boards. I would
strongly recommend both Intel and Nvidia's chipsets, they seem to be
pretty good.

The nforce4 chipset is relatively modern and supports up to 6 PCI
slots, so perhaps you can find a motherboard with 5 PCI slots that is
relatively new...

Gaaaak - nForce4 chipset? Do you know anything about it at all? Why in
the hell would you even mention it in the light of the evidence?

What evidence?

The evidence that he refuses to consider anything but an Intel chipset.
First you want to agree with his prejudice and now you want to propose a
non-Intel chipset alternative - not making sense to me.

Had it
not crossed your mind that what you're saying now is that an nForce4 is
gonna be OK as long as it's connected to an Intel CPU?... absurd!

nForce4 attaches to both AMD and Intel and is relatively modern, so it
can support faster memory, dual cores, etc. He can find a system that
fits his need irregardless of the CPU.

Ah so you knew that - now we've hit the nub: if nForce4 can be considered
valid for an Intel CPU it *can* also be considered for an AMD CPU. The
question is whether it's going to work at all. Like any other bleeding
edge chipset, you need to know what you're doing and study the
compatibility of everything - "modern" has its downside and requires a
little work.

From the specs:

PCI interface

* Integrates a fast PCI-to-PCI bridge running at 33 MHz. Includes
an arbiter that supports six external master PCI slots.
* Features of the PCI interface include:
o PCI 2.3-compliant, 5 V tolerant
o Supports six external PCI slots at 33 MHz
o Supports six bus master arbitration PCI master and slave
interfaces
o Supports both master-initiated and slave-initiated
terminations
o Bidirectional write posting support for concurrency
o Flexible routing of all four PCI interrupts
o Supports read ahead: memory read line (MRL) and memory read
multiple (MRM)

And those are different from other chipsets in what way? Anbody can write
specs - making it "work" is the rub.

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 04:59:24 GMT, max wrote:

On 28 Mar 2006 13:39:31 -0800, "David Kanter"
wrote:

It could be that for whatever weird reason their products just work
better or more reliably on Intel chipsets, compared to some of the
alternatives. It could also be that the MFG doesn't want to spend the
money to qualify another platform, which is entirely fair. It also
could be that when the product was designed that AMD wasn't really a
credible supplier and therefore was ignored (which if it was back
around Northwood, I can understand), and they simply don't have the
money to redo qualification.

The Intel-only recommendation is pretty common with high-end
multi-channel DVR boards, which is a relatively small marketplace
mostly dependent on networks of authorized dealers, and the tribal
wisdom that accompanies such models.

Here's an example of a typical hardware recommendation page for the
Geovision line of cards, which is one of the industry standards:
http://www.remote-security.com/gvrequirements.htm
"Must use Intel chip set motherboards on ALL models. The motherboard
can be Intel, ASUS, Gigabyte. The CPU can be AMD or Intel."

Yep, "tribal wisdom" fits well - just another example of a lazy mfr who
won't do the work...or isn't really a mfr at all and has no in-house
expertise to do the qualification and design tweaks. We had this crap
years ago with the AMD K6s when CD-R/RW drive mfrs preferred to not do the
work - they've fallen into line now: they do the testiing!

Yes, I'm aware that AMD CPUs don't run on Intel chipsets these days.
I didn't write the FAQ, just presented it as a typical example.

I believe it's because PC-based multi-channel DVR systems can be
tricky at the best of times, requiring a lot of PC resources, as you
pointed out. Reliability and stability is critically important on
these systems, and many just stick with the manufacturer's
recommendations to minimize the risk of problems and help with
technical support.

I maintain a network of stand-alone security DVRs, which cost more for
less capability, because they're far more stable than PC based ones.

Sounds like a good idea.:-)

Regardless, the OP came with a pretty specific and valid question, and
got a very rude response, including being accused of trolling, when
his post was clearly not a troll.

No, he asked... was given a suggestion, which he rejected in a manner that
revealed ignorance and prejudice. The question is: why did he post that
here in the first place? There are plenty of Intel fan, and mbrd mfr, Web
Forums for such a question. Hell a quick browse at NewEgg would have told
all... do'h there are mbrd mfrs, including Intel, who list their product
line on-line.

As for troll, while it's always *possible* the OP is naive, you are clearly
not aware of just how desperate Intel has gotten in recent times - it
shows.... we've had others - .shrug

Possibly the AMD fans can take it up with DVR board manufacturers and
security system vendors and get them to change their minds, rather
than beating up on the customers attempting to follow the vendor
recommendations.

Now who's throwing around accustaions - this is not a case of "fans"...
Intel *or* AMD - it's about having industry standards which a mfr wants to
adopt but only the subset of quirks which fit his "design"... as if a
future Intel chipset is going to work as well with their hobbled card as
the then current one... "Intel" is the magic word! This is BS and people
who design the stuff, like Keith, know this.

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

George,

my reasons for going with Intel are very much as Max says. I have
neither the resources nor the time to try out various motherboards to
see which one is most suitable.

I need to get it right the first time and if the general wisdom in that
area is go to with Intel then I think that is the one I should go for.

This is the quote I received from the cards retailer

I recommend Intel chipsets for use with the BT878 chipsets. While I've
never experienced a problem directly I'm heard of problems involving AMD
chipsets.

Should I still try out AMD? I checked the software manufacturer's
website and they also say go with Intel.

I am not using Geovision cards but on their website here is a list of
motherboards they have tested
http://www.remote-security.com/download/pctested.pdf.

I have also one thing to add. In the past I have built PCs at friends
and business associates request, and for the most part I used AMD for
its price/performance advantage and only used Pentiums when the person
directly requested it. I have no bias against AMD and have fallen
behind on the chipset and motherboard issues, which is why I posted
this question.

In these circumstance am I really serving the customers wishes by going
with more risky (however marginal) or simply untested AMDs solution
with the attendant time and expense, or should I play it safe and try
to get it right first time, within the limits of anecdotal evidence?

Are you inclined to sneer at individuals or companies who might not
have the resources - time, financial or technical, to test their
systems for absolute compatibility with all the motherboards and
chipsets out there? Is that considered to be a crime?

For all we know Intel chipsets also have problems in this area, but who
is going to make an issue of it?

On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 16:42:23 -0500, George Macdonald
wrote:

As for "qualification" if a card mfr won't do it, I'd be looking at a more
umm, credible mfr.

Unfortunately, AFAIK for these kind of applications, most if not all
of them will openly list Intel only support. It's kinda like VIA even
if their chipsets are credible now, a lot of people aren't going to
risk it.

Plus like you said, it cut costs for the manufacturer by not having to
test on AMD configurations or support customers who do. If you think
this is bad/lazy/pushing the responsbility, check out DFI for
motherboards. Last I read, they won't support/RMA a board if you're
not using at least a 480W PSU with 24pin connector.

It's of course interesting to note that they are the only ones with
that much trouble, allegedly due to low quality PSU such as
yesterday's top quality 480W PSU with only 20pin. PpPpP

--
A Lost Angel, fallen from heaven
Lost in dreams, Lost in aspirations,
Lost to the world, Lost to myself

On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 16:42:24 -0500, George Macdonald
wrote:

On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 04:59:24 GMT, max wrote:

Regardless, the OP came with a pretty specific and valid question, and
got a very rude response, including being accused of trolling, when
his post was clearly not a troll.

No, he asked... was given a suggestion, which he rejected in a manner that
revealed ignorance and prejudice. The question is: why did he post that
here in the first place? There are plenty of Intel fan, and mbrd mfr, Web
Forums for such a question. Hell a quick browse at NewEgg would have told
all... do'h there are mbrd mfrs, including Intel, who list their product
line on-line.

Actually, he said this:
"The PCI adapters in question are not considered to work well with AMD
boards. Pentium boards with Intel chipsets appear to be the preferred
type in that area."

This is true in the context of multi-input DVR cards - they're not
considered to work well, and Intel chipsets are preferred, per the
vendor and manufacturer recommendations.

This may not be an accurate characterization, and someone with the
time and money to try out a variety of MBs could probably disprove it,
but no one has volunteered.

It's just a fact of life in the multi-channel DVR card market. Note
that this isn't a high-volume commodity item, but is a low-volume
specialty item. Choices are limited if you want anything resembling
mainstream support.

He's stated in another post that he has nothing against AMD and has
used them before. In this case, though, it would be foolish to go
against the vendor recommendation without previous experience.

In any case, asking for motherboard or chipset recommendations on this
NG is not exactly news, and is hardly evidence of a troll.

As for troll, while it's always *possible* the OP is naive, you are clearly
not aware of just how desperate Intel has gotten in recent times - it
shows.... we've had others - .shrug

I'm pretty well versed with the situation at Intel, and with the
fanbois who show up on this NG, both AMD and Intel. It really seems
rather unlikely that Intel would send someone here to badmouth the
competition in the DVR arena, since it affects an extremely small
fraction of PC buyers, and is already established tribal knowledge in
that world. There's much more mileage to be had from speculations
about Conroe.

Possibly the AMD fans can take it up with DVR board manufacturers and
security system vendors and get them to change their minds, rather
than beating up on the customers attempting to follow the vendor
recommendations.

Now who's throwing around accustaions - this is not a case of "fans"...
Intel *or* AMD - it's about having industry standards which a mfr wants to
adopt but only the subset of quirks which fit his "design"... as if a
future Intel chipset is going to work as well with their hobbled card as
the then current one... "Intel" is the magic word! This is BS and people
who design the stuff, like Keith, know this.

Accusations? You mean suggesting that the naysayers are AMD fans?
That seems rather obvious, and is hardly an accusation. The OP has
the problem that his vendors say "Intel chipsets only", while others
say "BS! AMD will do fine, you naive troll!" Unfortunately, no one
has suggested an AMD-based board that will work with his DVR board or
that his vendor will support.

I agree that having global standards for such products is a Good
Thing, but unfortunately, that's not how it is in this particular
market. It may be foolish and lazy of them, but they represent a
very, very small fraction of a percent of the motherboard market.

It's kind of a silly thing to get all bent out of shape about, don't
you think?

max

On 29 Mar 2006 17:38:19 -0800, wrote:

For all we know Intel chipsets also have problems in this area, but who
is going to make an issue of it?

I should have thought of this before the thread devolved, but you may
be better off over at www.cctvforum.com. It's the best security DVR
forum I've found so far, and they have a number of threads on PCs,
including systems that the members have built for these apps.

It's mostly geared towards industry vendors, and they prefer the
higher-end solutions, but they can be very helpful if you have
specific questions that they're familiar with.

You may want to search on bt878 while you're there, as there are some
experiences listed.

max

On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 05:07:34 GMT, max wrote:

On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 16:42:24 -0500, George Macdonald
wrote:

On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 04:59:24 GMT, max wrote:

Regardless, the OP came with a pretty specific and valid question, and
got a very rude response, including being accused of trolling, when
his post was clearly not a troll.

No, he asked... was given a suggestion, which he rejected in a manner that
revealed ignorance and prejudice. The question is: why did he post that
here in the first place? There are plenty of Intel fan, and mbrd mfr, Web
Forums for such a question. Hell a quick browse at NewEgg would have told
all... do'h there are mbrd mfrs, including Intel, who list their product
line on-line.

Actually, he said this:
"The PCI adapters in question are not considered to work well with AMD
boards. Pentium boards with Intel chipsets appear to be the preferred
type in that area."

This is true in the context of multi-input DVR cards - they're not
considered to work well, and Intel chipsets are preferred, per the
vendor and manufacturer recommendations.

You mean they don't work wellperiod? A quick search *does* turn up that
the driver situation is umm, fraught with pitfalls and slop.

This may not be an accurate characterization, and someone with the
time and money to try out a variety of MBs could probably disprove it,
but no one has volunteered.

My only point is that it's the mfrs' job to prove/disprove one thing or the
other and they just don't seem to want to do it - nobody should have to
volunteer.

It's just a fact of life in the multi-channel DVR card market. Note
that this isn't a high-volume commodity item, but is a low-volume
specialty item. Choices are limited if you want anything resembling
mainstream support.

He's stated in another post that he has nothing against AMD and has
used them before. In this case, though, it would be foolish to go
against the vendor recommendation without previous experience.

In any case, asking for motherboard or chipset recommendations on this
NG is not exactly news, and is hardly evidence of a troll.

Finding out what Tony said -- that a mbrd with 5 PCI slots with a i9xx
chipset is not a likely configuration -- is not hard to determine from the
sources I mentioned.

As for troll, while it's always *possible* the OP is naive, you are clearly
not aware of just how desperate Intel has gotten in recent times - it
shows.... we've had others - .shrug

I'm pretty well versed with the situation at Intel, and with the
fanbois who show up on this NG, both AMD and Intel. It really seems
rather unlikely that Intel would send someone here to badmouth the
competition in the DVR arena, since it affects an extremely small
fraction of PC buyers, and is already established tribal knowledge in
that world. There's much more mileage to be had from speculations
about Conroe.

You're missing the point - to say that a supposedly standard PCI card is
not considered to work well in AMD-based systems in general, when there are
5 or 6 different candidate chipsets, is essentially saying that PCI is
unreliable on all but Intel chipsets. Why am I having to repeat this?

Possibly the AMD fans can take it up with DVR board manufacturers and
security system vendors and get them to change their minds, rather
than beating up on the customers attempting to follow the vendor
recommendations.

Now who's throwing around accustaions - this is not a case of "fans"...
Intel *or* AMD - it's about having industry standards which a mfr wants to
adopt but only the subset of quirks which fit his "design"... as if a
future Intel chipset is going to work as well with their hobbled card as
the then current one... "Intel" is the magic word! This is BS and people
who design the stuff, like Keith, know this.

Accusations? You mean suggesting that the naysayers are AMD fans?
That seems rather obvious, and is hardly an accusation. The OP has
the problem that his vendors say "Intel chipsets only", while others
say "BS! AMD will do fine, you naive troll!" Unfortunately, no one
has suggested an AMD-based board that will work with his DVR board or
that his vendor will support.

Ridiculous extrapolation of what was said.

AFAICT he hasn't actually said which DVR board so it would be unlikely that
anyone who was interested could give any advice at all.

I agree that having global standards for such products is a Good
Thing, but unfortunately, that's not how it is in this particular
market. It may be foolish and lazy of them, but they represent a
very, very small fraction of a percent of the motherboard market.

It's kind of a silly thing to get all bent out of shape about, don't
you think?

Ditto.

--
Rgds, George Macdonald