SPCR

Floppy connector placement really should not be an issue, given how useless floppy drives are these days. "Out of the way" is the best placement. That being said, if you do need a floppy drive, the placement in this board is exactly the same as the last board I used in a build with a floppy, and it is no problem, provided that you have a long enough flat floppy cable and some foresight. Just attach the cable before installing the motherboard in the case. Tuck the cable neatly UNDER the board with a nice 90 degree fold at the appropriate spot so that it comes out from the bottom towards the front of the case just a few inches from your floppy drive.

Mike, with both boards you reported HDMI issues. If I am going to buy a board with an HDMI output, it would be for a HTPC. Sub-par HDMI output is a showstopper. Do you think these issues are due to your kind of non-standard 1440x900 monitor? According to this review, that monitor is about a year old. Has anyone tried these boards on a newer, more typical HT TV? Thanks!

Avalanche wrote:Mike, with both boards you reported HDMI issues. If I am going to buy a board with an HDMI output, it would be for a HTPC. Sub-par HDMI output is a showstopper. Do you think these issues are due to your kind of non-standard 1440x900 monitor? According to this review, that monitor is about a year old. Has anyone tried these boards on a newer, more typical HT TV? Thanks!

1440x900 is not non standard. It's WXGA+

Looks like overscan issues with HDMI. How annoying!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overscan

Our take on the HDMI should be taken with a grain of salt, given that we use a monitor and not a real HDTV. We also have noticed over the months that depending on the driver used, the anomalies on AMD boards change slightly. Sometimes 1280x720 works better on our monitor, sometimes 1440x900. Sometimes it's overscanned, sometimes we get black borders.

Avalanche wrote:Mike, with both boards you reported HDMI issues. If I am going to buy a board with an HDMI output, it would be for a HTPC. Sub-par HDMI output is a showstopper. Do you think these issues are due to your kind of non-standard 1440x900 monitor? According to this review, that monitor is about a year old. Has anyone tried these boards on a newer, more typical HT TV? Thanks!

A year old screen is hardly old. Monitors are typically used for many years before being retired. As someone else pointed out, 1440x900 is fairly standard, too.

fwiw my main monitor on my main home pc is 1440x900 Acer and I've bought dozens of Dell monitors of that resolution for my work.

Dell 1908WFP being the nicer one with tons of USB ports and an adjustable stand. E198WFP being the cheaper one with tilt only and no USB ports but both are 19" screens and are relatively common.

To me 1280x1024 is the nonstandard resolution as it doesn't match the aspect ratio of any other common resolution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_resolution has plenty of detail on that.

To this day I'm still mad that they didn't design/sell those panels as 1280x960 instead.

MikeC and fyleow wrote:1440x900 is fairly standard

Sorry, I mean not a standard HD TV resolution. I am speculating that the HDMI on the board might be designed for 720p and 1080p primarily.

re the manually labelled picture above - in case the reviewer didn't know - in speedfan you can change the labels if you click the 'configure' button and there you can rename generic labels such as Fan1,Fan2,Temp1 etc to something more appropriate. there is even a facility to download correct setup from web (if your motherboard is in the database)

wim wrote:re the manually labelled picture above - in case the reviewer didn't know - in speedfan you can change the labels if you click the 'configure' button and there you can rename generic labels such as Fan1,Fan2,Temp1 etc to something more appropriate. there is even a facility to download correct setup from web (if your motherboard is in the database)

Yes I'm aware of that. I do the overlay so users can label themselves to whatever they wish. If I renamed all the labels you wouldn't know which is which when you got the board.

The database can be useful, but the boards we test are usually fairly new, so there typically aren't any configurations you can download.

Avalanche wrote:

MikeC and fyleow wrote:1440x900 is fairly standard

Sorry, I mean not a standard HD TV resolution. I am speculating that the HDMI on the board might be designed for 720p and 1080p primarily.

There's no difference between HDMI and DVI when it comes to video. It's entirely a software problem, unless the hardware is somehow defective.

What is the correct power consumed when it is off for Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article807-page7.html it shows 8W here
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article855-page5.html it shows 2W here

Which one should I trust?

Looks better than my Asus M3A78-EMH microATX motherboard. The southbridge heatsink is bigger and the BIOS seems to more options for fine control.

Wouldn't buy another Asus motherboard, though. At least, not for AMD CPUs. My motherboard is not good, my old Asus M2NPV-VM is horrible and this one is most likely to prove itself flawed in the long run.

jacky912 wrote:What is the correct power consumed when it is off for Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article807-page7.html it shows 8W here
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article855-page5.html it shows 2W here

Which one should I trust?

The original article. We never got a chance to retest the Gigabyte board, so it's a simple transcription error.

Lawrence Lee wrote:

jacky912 wrote:What is the correct power consumed when it is off for Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article807-page7.html it shows 8W here
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article855-page5.html it shows 2W here

Which one should I trust?

The original article. We never got a chance to retest the Gigabyte board, so it's a simple transcription error.

corrected

MikeC wrote:

Lawrence Lee wrote:

jacky912 wrote:What is the correct power consumed when it is off for Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article807-page7.html it shows 8W here
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article855-page5.html it shows 2W here

Which one should I trust?

The original article. We never got a chance to retest the Gigabyte board, so it's a simple transcription error.

corrected

Thanks for your effort

Lawrence Lee wrote:Yes I'm aware of that. I do the overlay so users can label themselves to whatever they wish. If I renamed all the labels you wouldn't know which is which when you got the board.

ah ok, good idea

wim wrote:

re the manually labelled picture above - in case the reviewer didn't know - in speedfan you can change the labels if you click the 'configure' button and there you can rename generic labels such as Fan1,Fan2,Temp1 etc to something more appropriate. there is even a facility to download correct setup from web (if your motherboard is in the database)

This is good to know -- Im going to look into that ASAP.

Were there any display (DVI/HDMI) problems with the Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H? Or are these problems isolated to the ASUS boards? Would you recommend ASUS or Gigabyte for a HD HTPC at this point? I suppose you wouldn't recommend ASUS due to the HDMI issues, correct?

kittle wrote:This is good to know -- Im going to look into that ASAP.

this user interface is not as intuitive as it could be so here is how to do it.. under the 'Configure' dialog accessible from the main window you can rename labels on Temperatures/Fans/Voltages/Speeds tabs by highlighting one and pressing F2. to use the automatic config facility you go to the 'Info' tab and click 'Get config' pushbutton in lower left corner. the database is here and you have to find a ticket number from the web and enter that into the Get config dialog

Just bought this motherboard, and I need some advice before building it.

Here's the setup:

board: M3A78 PRO
PSU: picoPSU-120W
CPU: AMD X2 4850E (underclocked at around 0.9V / 1.0 GHz)
RAM: 2GB DDR2-800 (one module only)
HDD1: 2.5" 160GB PATA (for Ubuntu)
HDD2: 3.5" Western Digital GP (for data)
+ one 120mm fan (fanmated to around 6-7V I'd assume)

This should be a pretty low power setup.

Now, for the questions:

1) Do I need to connect the 4-pin "p4" plug from the PSU to the motherboard (the picoPSU doesn't have one so I'd have to use an adapter but that's irrelevant).

2) If it is needed, and I don't connect it - what will happen?

3) If it is not needed, but I connect it - what will happen?

Thanks for any tips!

1) yes. It is the only source of voltage to the CPU.
2) it probably won't power up.

btw, if you got the picopsu-120 kit with 12V/5A power brick, you should read this: viewtopic.php?t=49521

3D PERFORMANCE

We usually run 3DMark05/06 to get a sense of how suitable the board's IGP is for 3D gaming, but unfortunately we were not able to get the test suite to run. The Futuremark splash screen would appear and then freeze.

I've had this same problem on 3DMark06 on my HD4870 and HD3650. The fix appears to be related to a .DLL. For Windows XP SP3 all you need to do is go "C:\WINDOWS\system32\Futuremark\MSC" and rename the "Direcpll.dll" file to something else (I use "Direcpll.dll.old"). I would assume that the file location will be similar under Vista.

I'm sorry but a modern motherboard, even with integrated graphics, should be able to support any resolution up to 1080p over hdmi *flawlessly* with 1:1 pixel mapping and zero overscan. Quite simply this is pathetic and inexcusable (the board not the reviewer) and you shouldn't be making excuses for Asus. Just because it's a monitor doesn't matter - these things should work *better* with a monitor (which tend not to distort images) if anything. HDTVs, especially the older ones, are prone to fiddling with pictures - digitally 'enhancing' them and overscanning etc.

Interestingly, when my dad got a new laptop last year, I guided him to a Samsung with hdmi out so that I could use it to watch hi-def movies on the new 32" Panasonic (1366x768) tv at my parents' home. It worked but I was staggered to find that you couldn't select the tv's native resolution! WTF?! Why not in this day and age with so many tvs at that resolution?! I've had 1:1 pixel mapping to my 1900x1200 dell monitor and my projector for *years* now. Still looks decent enough - don't get me wrong - but I am still absolutely flabbergasted that there was no option to correct this, not even in the latest drivers. Interestingly it is an ATI GPU inside the laptop so I don't know why they can't get it right...

PS any insight into this issue welcome!

Noli wrote:I'm sorry but a modern motherboard, even with integrated graphics, should be able to support any resolution up to 1080p over hdmi *flawlessly* with 1:1 pixel mapping and zero overscan.

You can expect this all you like but it's more the exception, not the rule. Should is a word for theorists; we deal with real boards. Perhaps you've been the recipient of too much "perfect digital world" tech PR. There have been very few systems/boards with IGP which can do what you demand. Notably, the few have mostly been AMD boards, and hardly any Intel chipset boards.

I just find it hard to understand - the integrated graphics on these boards are derived from the chips on discreet graphics cards, albeit in a tweaked way (mainly to reduce power usage) - graphics cards which for the best part of a decade have been able to display 2D graphics (over vga no less) flawlessly. I take your point, I'm just disappointed - it's barely worth Asus/Gigabyte et al including these graphics chipsets if they can't even do the job - and I'm 99.9% sure there are half height silent/near silent gfx cards out there that can do the job for relatively little money.

I understand that they don't, but I still believe they *should*. They may struggle on hd video but a static desktop?!?! They really really should display properly. After all, they don't seem to have problems displaying pixel perfect on nothing special 1900x1200 or 1650x1050 laptop screens. /sarcasm/ aren't nvidia/ati so clever for getting that right! My point is that consumers deserve for this to be done right by now and nothing you can say will persuade me otherwise I'm afraid

Noli wrote:My point is that consumers deserve for this to be done right by now and nothing you can say will persuade me otherwise I'm afraid

That's easy to agree with. It's not as easy to simply condemn Asus for not getting it right on this board when hardly anyone else does either.

Well maybe the fault's more with Intel than Asus! Still not excusable in my eyes of course Anyway, here's a little more insight in to the issue with the G45 chipset for any of those interested:

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=12677

Here's a snippet:

"Brezenski also talked a bit about review ExtremeTech did of an Intel DG45ID motherboard, which also found that Blu-ray acceleration didn't work. Even after an update to the review, the Intel system was still only able to score 30 out a possible 100 on the HD HQV test performed.

Brezenski says that his sources -- presumably within Intel -- have told him that the low HD HQV test scores were the result of a software player issue. Brezenski says that properly configured advanced de-interlacing would raise scores 20 points higher, and while he admits those scores are still not perfect, he says they are workable. Brezenski hopes driver tweaks will help improve performance even more in the future."

Hi guys, this is my first post here.

I am interested in this board, but I also want to know some minor details about M3A78 Pro, like does it supports AM2+ Power State Indicator specifications?

Power State Indicator specifications, is a function for AM2+ motherboard platform (Phenom only) to improve energy efficiency by disabling extra phases when CPU is at light loading (idling).

Also, what about C1E state? Are there any settings in BIOS (C1E) and does it function properly with Phenoms?

Cheeers