aopen pentium m motherboard
Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee
-
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 5:30 am
Board
If only some motherboards supported the Mobile AMD chip better, I wouldn't be so hot for one of these. I know the M is a little better with power and faster, but the price of the 2800/MB setup is nice.
Chris
Chris
Yeah, but it's not the only one. Seems like they've started using the chipset number in the motherboard name lately.dago wrote:but it's still strange that they don't follow their naming convention.
The name should be something like MX7GM ...
For instance, all their socket T boards have 865 or 915 in it. This is a good thing, making 855GMEm look even more "normal".
The board has made it to the US page.
http://usa.aopen.com/products/mb/
http://usa.aopen.com/products/mb/
and the European one as well.
Was it due to numerous emails ?
Anyway, it's a pity their sales channels sucks here (it's really difficult to find a precise aopen component besides cases).
Was it due to numerous emails ?
Anyway, it's a pity their sales channels sucks here (it's really difficult to find a precise aopen component besides cases).
Heatsink with fan are included with the mobo. It's a simple extruded aluminium heatsink with a 60x15 mm fan called "Lotes", never heard of it. Nevermind, I don't think I'd use any of them anyway.
Been looking at the retention bracket and done some measuring. It got the same distances between the holes as the P4 mobo I looked at, and the retention bracket has the same size (can't be totally sure though). So it looks like the biggest problem with changing heatsink could be the height, due to the lack of heatspreader on the CPU. Hopefully AOpen has used a retention bracket which is a bit lower.
Been looking at the retention bracket and done some measuring. It got the same distances between the holes as the P4 mobo I looked at, and the retention bracket has the same size (can't be totally sure though). So it looks like the biggest problem with changing heatsink could be the height, due to the lack of heatspreader on the CPU. Hopefully AOpen has used a retention bracket which is a bit lower.
-
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 5:30 am
Now... just have to find a vendor with one. Who's going to be the guinea pig?
Although, I do have to admit, I'm questioning some of the "greatness" of this setup. At 21W. do we need to still use a fan to cool the processor? (I'll assume we can use some good ones) If so, then I'm not totally sure (for my situation) if there would be a huge advantage. Certainly it would pump out less heat, but I have 1 case fan (5V), a Samsung drive and a SS400 w/ a PIV 2.4c. If I throw in a AMD 4000+, that's an extra 15W and I could move to a TM 120 HP setup and still run my processor fan at 5V. If I do the P-M and I still need a fan on the CPU, I doubt I could take out the 5V case fan. Maybe I'm missing something ... other than saving $16 a year in electricity costs.
Chris
Although, I do have to admit, I'm questioning some of the "greatness" of this setup. At 21W. do we need to still use a fan to cool the processor? (I'll assume we can use some good ones) If so, then I'm not totally sure (for my situation) if there would be a huge advantage. Certainly it would pump out less heat, but I have 1 case fan (5V), a Samsung drive and a SS400 w/ a PIV 2.4c. If I throw in a AMD 4000+, that's an extra 15W and I could move to a TM 120 HP setup and still run my processor fan at 5V. If I do the P-M and I still need a fan on the CPU, I doubt I could take out the 5V case fan. Maybe I'm missing something ... other than saving $16 a year in electricity costs.
Chris
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 12285
- Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
- Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Contact:
Chris, smart thermal management with minimal airflow is really what we silencers practise and preach. The best starting point is to have the lowest overall heat in the system. That 21W vs 60~80W in a P4 means not just a CPU power/heat reduction of 40~60W (which is amazing by itself) but also translates into that much less heat in the PSU as well.Schlotkins wrote:Although, I do have to admit, I'm questioning some of the "greatness" of this setup. At 21W. do we need to still use a fan to cool the processor?... Maybe I'm missing something ... other than saving $16 a year in electricity costs.
Take your current system. I'd guess that with your PSU, you're probably pulling 70~80W from the wall at idle and maybe 125-130W max. With a P-M in place of your P4, I'd guess the idle at <35W and the max at <70W. Maybe less. Can you run this CPU with no fan? With the right HS, I don't see why not -- there are great ones around these days. And can you fix the PSU fan voltage so it barely spins at all? Well with total 70W power draw, perhaps 20W of heat will be dissipated in the PSU, so why not?
These are guesses... the gist of it is:
** With such low overall thermals, you have many more choices about what kind of case to use, about going fanless with probably just about everything.
** Use a notebook drive and a modest video card and you could be down to under 50W max AC draw. That's getting into VIA mITX territory; you know how many fanless m-ITX system are offered by commercial sellers?
-
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 5:30 am
Certainly, I agree it's easier to go completely fanless with a P-M: no argument. If it can be run with no fan on the HS, then that's awesome. Hopefully a XP-120 can be hooked onto this bad boy and we're off and running. But if not, then I don't know if there's that much advantage. I can already get a fanless PSU. (I know, I'm a silent moron, but hey.. :>)
I think, for me anyway, it's one of those things if you aren't going for under 70W, then it's really not going to be THAT much different. I'm using an ATI9600NP (low power - 15Wish I bet) and I think I'm going to move to the mobile drive at some point (2.4W). So, it may not be a stretch for me to go fansless and be happy.
I'd love to be able to have a tiny case with no fans. If that can be pulled off, then I'm REALLY in. The Shuttle solution could be interesting...
Chris
I think, for me anyway, it's one of those things if you aren't going for under 70W, then it's really not going to be THAT much different. I'm using an ATI9600NP (low power - 15Wish I bet) and I think I'm going to move to the mobile drive at some point (2.4W). So, it may not be a stretch for me to go fansless and be happy.
I'd love to be able to have a tiny case with no fans. If that can be pulled off, then I'm REALLY in. The Shuttle solution could be interesting...
Chris
Well the A64 fan stops in ASUS boards when hitting lowest P-state at max 35 W (depends on model/stepping) if I'm not mistaken. So i guess it's not impossible. On the other hand I think the 35 W is quite theoretical when using Cool 'n' Quiet, but not when running at 800/1000 MHz constantly (underclocked). A CnQ enabled computer never runs at full CPU usage for any longer time because it then ramps up in speed and changes P-state.Schlotkins wrote:Although, I do have to admit, I'm questioning some of the "greatness" of this setup. At 21W. do we need to still use a fan to cool the processor?
I think it's possible, especially if you use good parts for it. Remember that 21 W is for the fastest 2 GHz too, so it must be lower for the slower ones if those number are any logical. The XP-120 would be overkill I think, maybe even the XP-90. Using that construction you end up having the heatpipes reheat the CPU since theres no fan. A heatsink that transports the heat away from the CPU is better, like the Shuttle ICE or even Thermalright SI-97. What you need is a heatsink optimised for passive use. I don't think you can take some good heatsink and just rip off the fan and it'll work optimal. For passive use you maybe need a heatsink with wider gaps between the fins so the convection can work properly. But yeah, if you go overkill-but-not-optimal it will still work. Personally I don't think that's the point though.
Or, like this with a 80 mm fan at low speed, I really like this one!
-
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 5:30 am
Here's some Pentium M processors:
http://www.excaliberpc.com/default.php? ... 1a&&page=2
There are some price cuts coming... I can't find the link on theinquirer at the moment. I have to check out the mb, but it's probably about $700 for the processor/MB @ 2.0ghz. The only downside is Intel is going with a 533mhz bus in Q1 and this MB is only 400mhz bus...
Chris
EDIT:
newegg.com has the 2.0 chip.
http://www.excaliberpc.com/default.php? ... 1a&&page=2
There are some price cuts coming... I can't find the link on theinquirer at the moment. I have to check out the mb, but it's probably about $700 for the processor/MB @ 2.0ghz. The only downside is Intel is going with a 533mhz bus in Q1 and this MB is only 400mhz bus...
Chris
EDIT:
newegg.com has the 2.0 chip.
Well the 1.3 GHz Celeron M got ramped up to 154 MHz FSB by those french guys who tested the DFI mini-ITX board. No crazy overvolt either, 1.31 V.
First I was going to say something about rather having a more modern chipset than faster FSB (both goes hand in hand in this case i think), but I changed my mind. The 855 got everything I want and 4x AGP speed doesn't make that much difference from what I know. Faster FSB yes, and a PCI/AGP lock (dream on...).
First I was going to say something about rather having a more modern chipset than faster FSB (both goes hand in hand in this case i think), but I changed my mind. The 855 got everything I want and 4x AGP speed doesn't make that much difference from what I know. Faster FSB yes, and a PCI/AGP lock (dream on...).
Dunno about coming CPU prices, but the AOpen 855gmem IS expensive in Japan compared to other prices over there. The lowest price I've seen is like 29000 Yen (250 USD) while the DFI Lanparty UT NF3 250GB (which is one of the newest, most wanted A64 mobo with tons of features and THE best overclocker) is only 13000 Yen. (= 110 USD, goes for 129 USD at newegg).Schlotkins wrote:I have to check out the mb, but it's probably about $700 for the processor/MB @ 2.0ghz.
Edit: BTW, the DFI board seems to be THE Mobile A64 mobo so far, and it's cheaper too......
-
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 5:30 am
Well, It's obvious that the Pentium M stuff is going for a premium. That article was interesting and basically they took the 100mhz and made it a 133mhz bus no problem with some overclocking.
The interesting thing is both the 1.8ghz and 2.0ghz are rated at 21W by intel even though they have the same voltage. Is that 21W a general number? In other words, if these processors are unlock and overclock that easily, maybe good just to get a 1.7 or something and O/C it to 2.0ghz.
Chris
The interesting thing is both the 1.8ghz and 2.0ghz are rated at 21W by intel even though they have the same voltage. Is that 21W a general number? In other words, if these processors are unlock and overclock that easily, maybe good just to get a 1.7 or something and O/C it to 2.0ghz.
Chris
They're not totally unlocked, are they? No way. I think they're like A64. They got a maximum multiplier, and you can lower it.Schlotkins wrote:Well, It's obvious that the Pentium M stuff is going for a premium. That article was interesting and basically they took the 100mhz and made it a 133mhz bus no problem with some overclocking.
The interesting thing is both the 1.8ghz and 2.0ghz are rated at 21W by intel even though they have the same voltage. Is that 21W a general number? In other words, if these processors are unlock and overclock that easily, maybe good just to get a 1.7 or something and O/C it to 2.0ghz.Chris
Anyway, that's maybe not so interesting, but a high FSB is. Look at the A64 people, they lower the multiplier to achieve faster FSB. So a totally unlocked CPU wouldn't make any difference for them at least.
Since Pentium M both exists as socket 478 and 479 I'm wondering what the difference is. For instance, Intel tells that the 2.0 GHz version is only available with 478 pins.
-
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 5:30 am
That's a good question:
http://processorfinder.intel.com/scripts/list.asp
The motherboard manual says: "This socket supports both uFCPGA and uFCBGA." I don't see anything about PPGA support. Also, is this right:
http://processorfinder.intel.com/script ... CorSpd=ALL
"Thermal Guideline: 100C"?!
And one other note, it appears the MB only supports drives up to 137GB.
Chris
http://processorfinder.intel.com/scripts/list.asp
The motherboard manual says: "This socket supports both uFCPGA and uFCBGA." I don't see anything about PPGA support. Also, is this right:
http://processorfinder.intel.com/script ... CorSpd=ALL
"Thermal Guideline: 100C"?!
And one other note, it appears the MB only supports drives up to 137GB.
Chris
Well that's typical for mobile CPUs, it's 95 for AMD.Schlotkins wrote: "Thermal Guideline: 100C"?!
WAIT!, You gotta be kidding me!!? Is it true? Where have you seen that? If the ATA got that limit, but not SATA, I could live with it.Schlotkins wrote:And one other note, it appears the MB only supports drives up to 137GB. Chris
-
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 5:30 am
Under specifications, here's what it says:
Integrated ATA100 Controller
Promise Serial ATA Control Chip [Support Serial ATA RAID 0 or 1]
Max Disk : : 144,000,000GB [by 48 bits LBA Spec.]
It doesn't say if that's both or what. I didn't think SATA has that problem and I'll be honest I'm not totally up on my IDE specs so I'm not sure.
Chris
Integrated ATA100 Controller
Promise Serial ATA Control Chip [Support Serial ATA RAID 0 or 1]
Max Disk : : 144,000,000GB [by 48 bits LBA Spec.]
It doesn't say if that's both or what. I didn't think SATA has that problem and I'll be honest I'm not totally up on my IDE specs so I'm not sure.
Chris
-
- Posts: 36
- Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 5:26 am
Well that's more or less standard now, just look at any mobo at AOpen. Phew, you almost got me there... don't understand where you got 137 GB from.Schlotkins wrote:Under specifications, here's what it says:
Integrated ATA100 Controller
Promise Serial ATA Control Chip [Support Serial ATA RAID 0 or 1]
Max Disk : : 144,000,000GB [by 48 bits LBA Spec.]
It doesn't say if that's both or what. I didn't think SATA has that problem and I'll be honest I'm not totally up on my IDE specs so I'm not sure.
Chris
-
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 5:30 am
-
- Posts: 36
- Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 5:26 am
-
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 5:30 am
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 12285
- Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
- Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Contact:
No idea about price.
Look at this image, it looks to me like a standard P4 HS retention frame:
http://club.aopen.com.tw/pss/largeview. ... 55GMEm-LFS
Look at this image, it looks to me like a standard P4 HS retention frame:
http://club.aopen.com.tw/pss/largeview. ... 55GMEm-LFS
Yes, I've done some measuring (see my earlier posts) and it seems to be the same. If you can use P4 heatsinks that would be awesome, lots of heatsinks to choose between.MikeC wrote:No idea about price.
Look at this image, it looks to me like a standard P4 HS retention frame:
http://club.aopen.com.tw/pss/largeview. ... 55GMEm-LFS