Final Words

As you saw in our benchmark results, there are very little performance differences to differentiate these 5 excellent 2nd generation Socket 754 boards in this roundup. Any of the 5 will make a great home for an Athlon 64 if the only criterion is performance; you won't have to worry much that Ivan down the street has a faster K8T800 PRO motherboard or nForce3-250 motherboard than you do, if you only run at stock speed.

However, in the real world, features do matter also, and if we look more closely at these 5, we do see several boards that stand out from the others. Although, all of these 5 motherboards are generally superior to the first generation nForce3-150 and K8T800 in terms of features and flexibility, some certainly out-shine others in the crowd. Both the Epox and the MSI feature the nForce3-250Gb version of nVidia's chipset. We think that the Gb version of nVidia's chipset is definitely an important feature for the on-chip Gigabit LAN, which is removed from the constraints of the PCI bus. nVidia's Firewall is also a useful feature that is only available in the Gb version of the chipset. We believe that the Gb version of the nF3-250 belongs on a high-end motherboard. Despite the fact that it is an incredibly feature-rich board, the Gigabyte K8NSNXP is a top-end motherboard that chooses to use the lower-end nForce3-250 chipset instead of the nForce3-250Gb. The feature set is excellent on the Gigabyte, but it is worth insisting on the Gb version of nForce3-250 if you are paying a premium for an NF3-250 motherboard.

At the other end of the spectrum is the Chaintech VNF-250, which we applaud for using nF3-250 because it is designed to sell for less than $100. It is a board designed to bring dynamite performance to a low price point and it does that very well. Using nF3-250 instead makes sense on a low-end board, and the Chaintech proves that you don't have to give up overclocking or performance if it's done the way it should be.

The other area that differentiates these boards is the included features, and how well they do or don't work. Here, we have to eliminate the Abit KV8 PRO, which is an excellent board otherwise because it is still caught up in teething pains. The 2nd board that we received does have a working PCI/AGP lock, verified by PCI Geiger, but it is still the only board in this roundup without ratios for the CPU. This feature alone makes the working PCI/AGP lock much less useful than it might be otherwise. Also, it strangely boots a 10X CPU at 9X. We are confident that Abit will fix what is wrong with the KV8 PRO. The Abit will likely become an outstanding board, but for now, there are still too many things wrong with the KV8 PRO to recommend it.

This brings us to our last criterion, overclocking performance, in our evaluation of these boards. Here, the Epox and Chaintech stand out as outstanding performers, reaching the highest overclocks that we have seen with great flexibility. The MSI K8N Neo also excelled in this area, but the maximum FSB of 300 is potentially more limiting than the 350 of the Epox or the 400 of the Chaintech. The Gigabyte was also a great performer here, but only if you used EZTune in Windows because the BIOS overclocking of the Gigabyte appears limited purposely to 242. We would have preferred to make the decision ourselves as to whether we would BIOS overclock or EZTune overclock.

Based on features, implementation, value, overclocking performance and flexibility, the Epox 8KDA3+ emerges as our Gold Editors Choice as the top Socket 754 motherboard. Epox has a long history of producing very fast motherboards with excellent overclocking and tweaking features and the 8KDA3+ certainly follows in that tradition. We were very pleased with the excellent feature set of this nF3-250Gb motherboard, and we believe most users will be very happy with the Epox as the building block for their new Athlon 64 system. Users who require Firewire will need to look at another board or plan to use a Firewire card, since it is not included on the Epox.

Our Silver Editors Choice is a tie between two very different motherboards, the MSI K8N Neo Platinum and the Chaintech VNF-250.

We are extremely pleased to award our Silver Editors Choice to the Chaintech VNF-250 motherboard. As the first in a new Zenith Value Series, we think Chaintech has a great idea - build an overclocker's dream board with all the performance and none of the frills for the lowest possible price. Chaintech also managed to do it without giving up really important features, which is even more commendable. The fact that Chaintech was a top performer in our overclocking tests at a price of less than $100 deserves our award. The VNF-250 proves that you can build a board any enthusiast will want without breaking the bank. Well done, Chaintech.

The MSI K8N Neo Platinum is a truly excellent motherboard that competes in every way with the best of the Socket 754 motherboards. Its performance is virtually identical to the Epox board, and the feature set is second to none. If Firewire is a requirement, the K8N Neo Platinum belongs at the top of your shopping list. If you want a board that makes top performance easy, then the MSI is also the top choice. Its CoreCell and D.O.T. Ranger auto overclock make the performance of overclocking accessible to even beginners. However, the auto features can be turned off if you like to "roll your own" for top performance. Users will also be pleased with the features that they will find in the box on this high-end Platinum series board.

Next week will represent the launch of the new Socket 939 processors from AMD. The new Socket 939 chipsets are the same chipsets that you see here: nForce3-250 and K8T800 PRO. The move to Dual-Channel and Socket 939 will be very important to some, but it will not represent the quantum leap in performance that some are expecting. Dual-Channel, after all, did not make a huge difference in the performance of FX and A64 chips when they were the same clock speed with the same cache. What 939 will do is make Dual-Channel more affordable across the board for Athlon 64 processors. It will also make these outstanding 2nd generation Socket 754 boards an even better buy. It will be a very good time to build a new Athlon 64 system - whatever the flavor!

Standard Workstation Performance
Comments Locked

30 Comments

View All Comments

  • Odeen - Monday, May 31, 2004 - link

    There is a difference between SATA native to chipset, and SATA native to the OS.

    SATA native to chipset means the chipset runs the SATA internally, off the Hypertransport or V-Link bandwidth, which is at least a gigabyte/second.

    Intel's implementation of SATA is cool because to the OS it emulates a standard IDE controller. (Thus it's "native" to the OS.) The downside of this approach is that every OS other than XP gets horribly confused seeing two primary and two secondary controllers. (i.e. your PATA1 is Primary, your PATA2 is Secondary, your SATA1 is.. again Primary) Without "compatibility" options in the BIOS, which limits you to four drives total (i.e. SATA channels become masters on IDE1 and IDE2, with PATA masters becoming slaves, and PATA slaves dropping off the map, or, as an alternative, PATA2 disappearing, and SATA1 and SATA2 becoming PATA1 Master and PATA1 Slave) Win2K and DOS-based utilities (such as bootable Antivirus or Partitioning program CD's and utilities like the drive test disks that you get with a hard drive,) fail on startup.

    Running SATA as a SCSI-over-IDE, requiring drivers, is a more flexible approach, but requires the use of driver floppies. Still, there's something neat about having four drives all hooked up as masters (2 SATA / 2 PATA) and installing XP without driver floppies.

    I'm not sure how it can be remotely possible with a 4 drive SATA controller, though.
  • sprockkets - Monday, May 31, 2004 - link

    Does anybody know if the NF3 chipset has any functionality similar to Intel's SATA, like is SATA done natively without needing any special drivers or programs for the os to use or understand?
  • rms - Monday, May 31, 2004 - link

    I also would have preferred to see feature benchmarking instead of cpu/memory benchmarking.

    rms
  • Zak - Sunday, May 30, 2004 - link

    2 RAM slots on the Abit mobo??? They call THAT an improvement??? Why can't there be at least 4? With 1GB chips' prices being still very high that would be a major selling point for many. I'd upgrade my mobo instantly if I could stick 4 512MB DDR400 chips and not have them run at 333...

    Zak
  • Odeen - Sunday, May 30, 2004 - link

    I'm very surprised that none of the motherboards except for MSI actually implemented all the features of their chipsets. Both the NF3-250GB and the K8T800 Pro support 4 chipset-level SATA ports, but only MSI has all 4. If it wasn't for that Corecell silliness, I'd be taking a long, hard look at the MSI board.
  • Crassus - Sunday, May 30, 2004 - link

    Whats the point of showing benchmarks when all the boards perform within margin of error? When the memory controller is part of the CPU there's IMHO little point in benchmarking it.

    Why not go after the components that make a bigger difference, esp. HDD, Ethernet and stuff in terms of throughput, CPU utilisation and so?
  • JustAnAverageGuy - Saturday, May 29, 2004 - link

    #11

    In RAM, generally speed increases are more noticible in real world performance than timings.

    Obviously if you have 400 cas 3-3-3-8, versus 400 cas 2-2-2-11, 2-2-2-11 would win. Generally though, speed is more important than timings after a certain point.

  • bigtoe33 - Saturday, May 29, 2004 - link

    #9

    I think you may have one of these supposed 3000 boards that have non-pro chipsets that Abit says are pro chipsets but really appear to be not..

    I would take your issue to Abit.
  • qquizz - Saturday, May 29, 2004 - link

    Concerning the overclock. I can overclock the crap out of my XP2100+, but I keep it at levels where it's stable using Prime95 and Memtest. I wonder if these overclocks can meet my standards?
  • gplracer - Saturday, May 29, 2004 - link

    All of the ram in this comparision was CAS3. I wonder how the CAS3 at 270mhz compares to CAS@ at 250mhz. I run my corsair at that speed now.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now