RS780 board availability

tutu · Post by **tutu** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 6:30 pm

It appears that you can only use VGA+DVI/HDMI and not DVI+DVI or DVI+HDMI as the digital connection serves both.

I suppose I could connect my LCD up via DVI and then my Plasma TV by VGA (which is the configuration I use at the moment). But I wanted to use DVI for my LCD and HDMI for the TV.

I'm guessing VGA provides a better picture due to 1:1 pixel mapping anyway (my TV is only 1024x768).

The ASUS M3A78-EH is the board I'm interested in, it's ATX but not available yet.

Mikael · Post by **Mikael** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:31 am

Okay guys, I've ordered a GeForce 8200 board, the ASUS M3N78-EMH HDMI. The reason I'm posting this in this thread is that I think those who are interested in the 780G may also be interested in the GeForce 8200.

I'll probably get the board tomorrow. I have a 65nm X2 4400+ rev. G2 that I will use with it and I'm going to measure the board's performance and power consumption.

I wasn't planning on buying this board, but the constant delay of other GeForce 8200 and my curiosity made me order it anyway. Atleast I'll have something to play with for a while.

yefi · Post by **yefi** » Sat Mar 29, 2008 11:54 am

Moogles wrote:Does 780G support dual-link DVI? One review said it does, but "under condition" and never bothered to point out what the condition was.

I'd like an IGP that can do 2560*1600. I know Asus' 690G board does this, but very poorly and with many issues. Will 780G be any better?

Well let me warn you the 740G doesn't, or at least Gigabyte's implementation of it doesn't. Just an interference pattern at that res and I would be guessing their 780G is no different.

alcuin · Post by **alcuin** » Sun Mar 30, 2008 7:27 pm

I'm very sad to say that I could not get my Dell 3007WFP-HC to work at max resolution on my 780G Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H, despite everything I've read on all the review sites about the 780G having dual-link dvi support. Maybe the GF8200 will be the board to finally give me onboard dual-link support.

quikkie · Post by **quikkie** » Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:06 am

I have the micro-atx version of the 780G Asus motherboard if anyone has any questions about it I'll do my best to answer them.

yefi · Post by **yefi** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 8:39 am

alcuin wrote:I'm very sad to say that I could not get my Dell 3007WFP-HC to work at max resolution on my 780G Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H, despite everything I've read on all the review sites about the 780G having dual-link dvi support.

You know, I think the 780G may very well support dual-link, but that GB may very well have equipped it with only a single-link DVI.

Unfortunately, I don't have any reason to buy another mobo, but I'd be really interested to know if anyone can run WQXGA on another manufacturer's 780G mobo.

Spare Tire · Post by **Spare Tire** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:12 pm

Does the desktop 780G support powerXpress like the mobile? Early previews said that it did.
If it doesn't, i'm gonna go with nvidia HybridPower instead.
It's wierd, since before the parts were released, wikipedia made it look like the 780G was the most energy efficient chipset because it was on 55nm. Then it came out and people said it consumed more than the 690G

jessekopelman · Post by **jessekopelman** » Tue Apr 08, 2008 12:07 am

Spare Tire wrote:Does the desktop 780G support powerXpress like the mobile? Early previews said that it did.
If it doesn't, i'm gonna go with nvidia HybridPower instead.
It's wierd, since before the parts were released, wikipedia made it look like the 780G was the most energy efficient chipset because it was on 55nm. Then it came out and people said it consumed more than the 690G

Most energy efficient is not the same as lowest consumption. The 780 IGP has more than twice the power of 690 IGP, so as long as it consumes less than twice the power it is more energy efficient. Complete motherboards have many other power consuming components in addition to IGP -- you really need to line up two boards that have exactly the same features to do a good comparison.

ryboto · Post by **ryboto** » Tue Apr 08, 2008 6:55 am

It appears Abit is releasing a 780G board, TechPowerUp has a little info on it here. I've always liked Abit boards, and since I hadn't heard about their take on the new chipset I was all settled to jump on the Gigabyte bandwagon.

loimlo · Post by **loimlo** » Tue Apr 08, 2008 7:50 am

In addition to mATX 780G, Abit likes to release a ATX Geforce8200 board, but where's the mATX Geforce8200? It would be a strong opponent to other mATX boards, too. Btw, I've to agree with you that Gigabyte 780G seems to be the dominator in the market at this point. However, I will wait for Biostar & Abit 780G/Geforce8200 boards, since they had impressed me with decent motherboards during 690G/7050 days.

http://www.abit.com.tw/page/ta/motherbo ... cket%20AM2
http://www.abit.com.tw/page/ta/motherbo ... cket%20AM2

frank2003 · Post by **frank2003** » Wed Apr 09, 2008 2:52 pm

Just noticed newegg is now selling the BIOSTAR board for $90:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6813138105

loimlo · Post by **loimlo** » Thu Apr 10, 2008 4:40 am

Thanks, but it is a pity that I am not from USA. Anyway, I'll ask my relatives to carry one for me from mainland China.

Spare Tire · Post by **Spare Tire** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 5:21 pm

jessekopelman wrote:
Spare Tire wrote:Does the desktop 780G support powerXpress like the mobile? Early previews said that it did.
If it doesn't, i'm gonna go with nvidia HybridPower instead.
It's wierd, since before the parts were released, wikipedia made it look like the 780G was the most energy efficient chipset because it was on 55nm. Then it came out and people said it consumed more than the 690G
Most energy efficient is not the same as lowest consumption. The 780 IGP has more than twice the power of 690 IGP, so as long as it consumes less than twice the power it is more energy efficient. Complete motherboards have many other power consuming components in addition to IGP -- you really need to line up two boards that have exactly the same features to do a good comparison.

Actually, what was stated in the wikipedia article were not effiency figures, whatever that may be, but power consumption, in Watts. And it was lower.