Please register or login. There are 0 registered and 329 anonymous users currently online. Current bandwidth usage: 326.30 kbit/s November 30 - 12:23pm EST 
Hardware Analysis
      
Forums Product Prices
  Contents 
 
 

  Latest Topics 
 

More >>
 

    
 
 

  You Are Here: 
 
/ Forums / Socket-775, an update from the trenches
 

  Intel 775 - Why did Intel cave in and start adding audio to there chip sets? 
 
 Author 
 Date Written 
 Tools 
Karl Carroll Oct 01, 2004, 03:26pm EDT Report Abuse
Ya know I like the 775 socket and I am glad to see PCI-E coming along as quickly as it is but I don't know why Intel feels a need to add HD Audio to thier chip set for the 775. One of the great things about Intel motherboards and chipsets was that they only had the basic functions needed by a chipset and none of the frills that other chipsets felt compelled to add. When I build a system I want the best performance possible for the money I can spend. Unless a chipset feature eliminates the need for me to purchase that feature seperately, by besting or equalling the add-on solution, it is wasted silicon as far as I'm concerned.

I know there are system builders that will try to convince the unwary buyer that HD Audio is all they will ever need but the reality is that most medium to high end add-on audio cards offer a better solution with better performance and features. It just makes little sense to me to waste system resources on a mediocre solution when most people are going to disable it any way and pop in an add-on sound card.

Now with GigaLAN there is an obvious performance edge for the built in solution as there is for the USB ports and any other type of I/O but audio and graphics almost always fall short of the mark.

On an other note, I agree with you Sassen that Socket 775 and PCI-E, while being a perfectly good platform, doesn't at this time justify an upgrade for any one with a well equipped Socket 478 system and 800 FSB P4. I would love to put together a 775 system with a PCI-E X800XT but I also plan to wait for the 1066FSB chipset before I bother upgrading from my current Lan Party 875B 2.8 P4 socket 478 system.

I might even go another full year and just upgrade my current system to a 3.4 P4 and get an AGP X800XT. Of course that will depend on pricing and availability of Socket 478 processors. Who knows, I might even have an AMD FX55 64bit system in my future.

EB


Want to enjoy fewer advertisements and more features? Click here to become a Hardware Analysis registered user.
Shadow_Ops_Airman1 Oct 01, 2004, 03:50pm EDT Report Abuse
>> Re: Intel 775 - Why did Intel cave in and start adding audio to there chip sets?
Intel Has had Audio Built into the motherboards for a long time, also they are thinking that putting the audio into the chipset would be cheaper, more like an area in there that controls all of the audio functions.

AMD Athlon XP-M 2500+ (133x14= 1867MHz) (209x11= 2299MHz)
DFI LP NF2 Ultra-B (Hellfire 3EG Rev2)
Antec SX800, Neo HE 500, 4 Antec 8CM Fans
Thermalright SI-97 1 Antec Tricool 12CM Fan
CL SB XFi Xtreme Music
2x Barracuda HDs (250/400)
2x Samsung Write
mothow Oct 01, 2004, 04:11pm EDT Report Abuse
>> Re: Intel 775 - Why did Intel cave in and start adding audio to there chip sets?
On board audio sounds great on my AI7 .I have no complaints It rocks with my Z640's.Now if i went and bought some better speakers like z680 or some other kickbutt system i would go with a top notch sound card but im very happy with the onboard sound of my system.

ASRock Z97 Extreme 4 / i7 4790K / Corsair H80i / 4x4GB Crucial Ballistix Smart Tracer DDR3 1600 / 1TB Western Digital Caviar Black / 240GB Mushkin Chronos Deluxe SSD / 2x Evga GTX 670 FTW 2GB in SLI / Sound Blaster Recon3D Fatal1ty / Corsair HX1000w
Karl Carroll Oct 01, 2004, 04:32pm EDT Report Abuse
>> Re: Intel 775 - Why did Intel cave in and start adding audio to there chip sets?
Well I have 20 bit 5.1 sound on my Lan Party 875B Pro motherboard and maybe I am just real picky about sound, I don't think so, but it just doesn't even come close to the sound I get with my Audigy 2 ZS Platinum PCI sound card. Plus onboard sound is extremely limited for alternative input sources. I could only connect one of my optical drives directly to the motherboard with no aux input for my TV tuner cards sound, no loop thru for my modem cards audio, and no optical inputs without purchasing an add-on port that is almost impossible to get if you don't know someone at the factory.

If I was building a system and I had no money left I could get by with the onboard sound but it would definately limit the usefulness of my system. I would have to choose between my DVD and my CD for audio hookups, I could no longer run my modem as a speaker phone, and it would be much harder to record and edit my guitar,

Personally I would rather save the 10 or 20 bucks that onboard sound might cost or at least have the energy spent on audio put into enhancing the performance of the rest of the system.

EB


Shadow_Ops_Airman1 Oct 01, 2004, 05:04pm EDT Report Abuse
>> Re: Intel 775 - Why did Intel cave in and start adding audio to there chip sets?
my only complaint is the MIDI emulation it uses, i mean a MS codec, comeon it sux, the Midi on my SB PCI 512 sounds better than that

AMD Athlon XP-M 2500+ (133x14= 1867MHz) (209x11= 2299MHz)
DFI LP NF2 Ultra-B (Hellfire 3EG Rev2)
Antec SX800, Neo HE 500, 4 Antec 8CM Fans
Thermalright SI-97 1 Antec Tricool 12CM Fan
CL SB XFi Xtreme Music
2x Barracuda HDs (250/400)
2x Samsung Write
Gunter Hinderle Oct 03, 2004, 03:26pm EDT Report Abuse
>> Re: Intel 775 - Why did Intel cave in and start adding audio to there chip sets?
I tried to upgrade my Asus P4800-C Deluxe a few weeks ago and had trouble finding a 3.2C, lots of 3.2E around....... something stinks...... never seen a family of processors get scarce so fast especially if they perform better than the newer product. Nothing wrong with Prescotts on 775 sockets (I woudn't buy one yet though) but for s478 the C version is the only way to go. I don't like being forced into buying garbage. Considering the power and heat problems alone, you would think Intel would be a little more environmentally responseably given that they had the choice as was the case with the s478 platform. I do applaud Intel for pioneering new technology and I undestand that growing pains are inevidtable but in the case of the 478 socket Prescott I think we've suffered enough.
P.S. I finally managed to track down a 3.2C, idle temp. 25degC after running benchmarks it climbs all the way up to 34degC(I have a few case fans)
Happy Camper now!!

Karl Carroll Oct 03, 2004, 06:13pm EDT Report Abuse
>> Re: Intel 775 - Why did Intel cave in and start adding audio to there chip sets?
I agree with you about the Northwood over Prescot preference but am not surprised that Intel would want to push the Prescot processors seeing as they have a sizeable amount invested in it's developement. What I don't understand is why they would come to market with a product that shows no major improvements over what it is replacing and actually has many drawbacks. I can only assume that the "E" variant P4's are far more cost effective.

So much so that Intel has decided that it is worth the risk of alienating some of it's user base and chasing them off to the AMD 64 camp. One of the reasons I have chosen to stay with the P4 over the AMD processors is the heat issue and with Prescot that is gone. Now maybe because of the increased silicon die effeciency Intel will be able to drastically lower the price of the P4 processors.

My bet is that they were getting an increasing amount of pressure from the OEM camp to lower the per unit costs for the P4 and that Prescot and LGA775 are primarily aimed at that issue more than any other. AMD has really been putting the pressure on Intel with it's lower per unit costs and it looks to me that this is an effort to deal with that issue.

I would suspect that early next year we will see the 1066FSB, 64bit architecture, and 5GHz to 6GHz clock speeds, all intended to satisfy the performance issue. It would have been much harder to acheive that goal though if OEM sales had suffered any more than they already have.

Of course that still begs the question as to why they seem to be cutting production of the Northwood core. Maybe there just isn't enough fabrication space to handle both or maybe they just goofed and thought users would be quick to jump on the Prescot bandwagon.

Hopefully they will realize the mistake and Northwood processors will start showing up again soon.

EB

Wayne Bradford Oct 15, 2004, 08:42am EDT Report Abuse
>> Re: Intel 775 - Why did Intel cave in and start adding audio to there chip sets?
Northwoods are probably gone forever! larger die and cost per unit is what made them scarce, I would think.
Prescots are good performers, I have a socket 478, 2.8a (533 fsb) @ 3.61 and it performs well and is stable. But I must also say that it is on water. Right out of the box it ran 10 degrees hotter than my northwood. I also see no advantage with the larger cash on a prescot (as far as I can tell through normal use) I'm sure there is a benefit however I can not detect it.
I have decided to move to AMD A64 3200+ 90 nano. I feel that Intel has moved from the enthusiast market in favor of mass production for the common user.





 

    
 
 

  Topic Tools 
 
RSS UpdatesRSS Updates
 

  Related Articles 
 
 

  Newsletter 
 
A weekly newsletter featuring an editorial and a roundup of the latest articles, news and other interesting topics.

Please enter your email address below and click Subscribe.