AMD motherboards, which SATA controllers DON'T work?

vbimport

#1

Looking to put together a new system with AMD Phenom X4 AM+ motherboard.
Looks like the choices for chipsets/SATA controllers are AMD/ATI and NVidia. Can somebody tell me what NOT to get for trouble-free support of optical drives?

The Nvidia controllers look to be offering 5-6 SATA ports, and some others offer 4 plus a secondary controller. the AMD/ATI controllers look to be mostly 4 ports plus secondary controllers.

I need as many SATA ports as I can get, no RAID, and support for at least 2 optical drives and 3-4 hard drives if possible. Will likely use IDE also. Preferring not to go to a PCI card.
I’m assuming that most if not all of the secondary SATA controllers are non-friendly for optical drives.


#2

Hi,[quote=CDan;2170072]the AMD/ATI controllers look to be mostly 4 ports plus secondary controllers.[/quote]Seems as if the SB700 has 6 Sata ports, so no additional controller is needed there.

My brother owns a 690/SB600 based mainboard, where he has two Sata burners attached plus an old drive hooked on the Pata controller. (Sata runs in IDE mode of course)

I admit, I am not sure if this good ODD compatibility also applies to the newer AMD/Ati chipsets.

Michael


#3

Looking at nVidias current track record I wouldn’t touch their chipsets with a ten foot long stick. I’ve had good experience with AMD chipsets (primarily SB450 and SB600) so I would suggest that you go for SB600 or SB700 equipped motherboard. People also in general seem have much better support/performance/compatibility with AMD chipsets in Linux/Unix.

GA-MA78GM-S2HP looks like a very good choice IMHO


Available over at ncix(us)

I don’t see why you wouldn’t go for Intel which are superior in all ways not to mention chipsets…
//Danne


#4

[quote=DiiZzY;2170085]
I don’t see why you wouldn’t go for Intel which are superior in all ways not to mention chipsets…
[/quote]you can’t connect a Pata ODD to recent Intel based motherboards. :wink:


#5

Huh?
Most use jMicron, Marvell or SiL controllers (I’m not sure with SiL for PATA), not optimal but they do what they’re supposed to do.
//Danne


#6

[QUOTE=DiiZzY;2170141]Huh?
Most use jMicron, Marvell or SiL controllers (I’m not sure with SiL for PATA), not optimal but they do what they’re supposed to do.
//Danne[/QUOTE]

True. But there are an increasing number of Intel-based motherboards which have no PATA connectors at all.


#7

[quote=DiiZzY;2170141]Huh?
Most use jMicron, Marvell or SiL controllers (I’m not sure with SiL for PATA), not optimal but they do what they’re supposed to do.[/quote]And those add-on controllers often are source of trouble with DVD burners. Not sure about SiI either :wink:

Michael


#8

Don’t forget IT(E) so there are solutions available…
//Danne


#9

[QUOTE=mciahel;2170080]Hi,Seems as if the SB700 has 6 Sata ports, so no additional controller is needed there.

Michael[/QUOTE]

It’s a little odd, I’m seeing boards with 4, 5 and 6 ports on the SB700. 8 or 10 would be nice. :wink:


#10

No chipset supports that natively afaik
Get a PCI/PCIe controller card?
//Danne


#11

Only one that I am aware that has 10 SATA

Link: http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/Products/Motherboard/Products_Spec.aspx?ClassValue=Motherboard&ProductID=2460&ProductName=GA-N680SLI-DQ6

This one has 8 SATA

Link: http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/Products/Motherboard/Products_Spec.aspx?ClassValue=Motherboard&ProductID=2543&ProductName=GA-P35-DS3R

I have not see any AMD boards that have 8 to 10 on the SB700.

6 Max

:cool::cool:


#12

Simple because there’s no southbridge that supports more than 6 SATA devices for consumers (AFAIK).
//Danne


#13

Anybody know what’s the difference between these chipsets?

790X
790GX
790FX


#14

790X - Cut down version of 790FX
790GX - Integrated graphics (HD3300)
790FX - Without integrated graphics

I would say that you’re wasting your money not going for a 780G motherboard.
//Danne


#15

Some more data for ya.

Link: http://ixbtlabs.com/articles3/mainboard/amd-770-790-chipsets.html

I am currently running this board.

Link: http://www.giga-byte.com/Products/Motherboard/Products_Overview.aspx?ProductID=2690

I’ve been very happy with it so far.

:cool::cool:


#16

[QUOTE=platinumsword;2172059]Some more data for ya.

Link: http://ixbtlabs.com/articles3/mainboard/amd-770-790-chipsets.html

I am currently running this board.

Link: http://www.giga-byte.com/Products/Motherboard/Products_Overview.aspx?ProductID=2690

I’ve been very happy with it so far.

:cool::cool:[/QUOTE]
Prolly too much information. :o

Been staring at MB’s till I’m stupid. There’s a couple Gigabytes that would interest me, but I’m scared of Gigabyte due to so may negative user reviews. (and because one died on me)

Seems like every board has 16 things I don’t care about and lacks one thing I need. :rolleyes: Firewire is getting hard to find too. Ah well, keep looking.

Oh…what’s the difference between integrated ATI 3200 and ATI 3300? One or the other better for watching BD movies?


#17

It’s only faster as far as I can tell


I’ve had good experience with GA-MA78GM-S2H (non P and the former 690G) and I fail the see what you should shell out twice as much for 790GX…
It’s not slower or anything except gaming video performance, if you want to add a video card later there’s nothing stopping you.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=992503 - A long thread about it :slight_smile:
I still think though that Intel gives you more bang for the buck…
//Danne


#18

Any reason why you would go with on board graphics?

I have read in some other forums that there has been a lack of driver support from ATI for the IGP’s in question.

:cool::cool:


#19

Read again, there’s builtin support for IGPs in Catalyst and your links seems to left out some information…
Sideport works fine on 780G too, obvious evidence… http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/Products/Motherboard/Products_Overview.aspx?ProductID=2859
It should be mentioned that it gives you about 10% better video performance (which is quite little) but it saves you some ram.
On the other hand, RAM is cheap so there’s no point no going to 4Gb and since you would like to run 32-bit Windows (for compatibility reasons) you’ll only have 3,3Gb accessable (unless you want to use PAE which is a bad idea) which leaves you with ~700Mb spare for video memory.
//Danne


#20

[QUOTE=platinumsword;2172108]Any reason why you would go with on board graphics?

I have read in some other forums that there has been a lack of driver support from ATI for the IGP’s in question.

:cool::cool:[/QUOTE]

Cause it’s there. :wink: Don’t care about high-performance video or gaming.

I’m finding nothing to dislike about this ASRock board. If the onboard video doesn’t please me, there plenty of cheap cards around.