AMD 880g where does it fit

[kornphlake]

I'm having trouble finding anything useful about the AMD 880G chipset, other than to say it's new technology and my brilliant deduction that 880 is higher than 790 so it must be better. What does the 880 chipset have to offer? Why am I having trouble finding anything written about this chipset that isn't a restated press release?

 

[hans007]

I'm having trouble finding anything useful about the AMD 880G chipset, other than to say it's new technology and my brilliant deduction that 880 is higher than 790 so it must be better. What does the 880 chipset have to offer? Why am I having trouble finding anything written about this chipset that isn't a restated press release?

800 series is barely different thant the 700 series other than the southbridges.


so basically if you just compare the north bridges and south bridges

785G = dx10.1 igp with 500mhz clock
880G = 785G with 560mhz clock
890GX = 785G @ 700mhz clock
780G = DX 10 igp without multiple hd stream decode with 500mhz clock
790GX = 780G @ 700mhz clock


and they can be paired with any south bridge since they use all hypertransport 2.

as far as i can tell

sb 700 has sata2
sb 710 is sb700 + ACC
sb 750 has ACC and raid
sb 850 is basically an sb750 with sata 3

I think the 870 and 770 are effectively the same chipset as well. same withthe 790FX and 890FX (basically are the 770/870 but can support dual x16 pci-e 2.0). just generally 8 series northbridges come with SB850, but some hhave sb710.

got all that? HAHA. don't you love the relabeling of parts....

 

[kornphlake]

Thanks, that makes sense, at least the description makes sense. So 785, 880 and 890 all have DX 10.1 with increasingly higher clock speeds. The 780 and 790 have DX 10 and increasingly higher clock speeds. The southbridge is actually a bit more cut and dry, higher numbers have more features.

The numbering scheme is still confusing, but at least I have some comparison of good, better, best.

 

[DietDrThunder]

I've got a couple of questions regarding the 880G. Can you couple the onboard video with a video card and drive two monitors? I was wanting to wait for an 890gx mATX motherboard, but neither Gigabyte nor ASUS have released one. Anyway, if you can add a video card and drive two displays, what video card would you pair with this board?

 

[jthunderloc]

I've got a couple of questions regarding the 880G. Can you couple the onboard video with a video card and drive two monitors? I was wanting to wait for an 890gx mATX motherboard, but neither Gigabyte nor ASUS have released one. Anyway, if you can add a video card and drive two displays, what video card would you pair with this board?

Any modern graphics card can run dual monitors, and I wouldnt be surprised if the on board graphics could drive dual monitors as well.

-Wes

 

[DietDrThunder]

Any modern graphics card can run dual monitors, and I wouldnt be surprised if the on board graphics could drive dual monitors as well.

-Wes

That is part of my confusion. When I look at the specs for the GA-880GM-USB3 on the gigabyte website it shows the following:

Integrated in the North Bridge:

1. 1 x D-Sub port
2. 1 x DVI-D port (Note 3) (Note 4)
3. 1 x HDMI port (Note 4)

(Note 3) The DVI-D port does not support D-Sub connection by adapter.
(Note 4) Simultaneous output for DVI-D and HDMI is not supported.

When I look at the MSI website for the 890GXM-G65, it just lists 1 VGA, 1 HDMI, and 1 DVI, but doesn't say anywhere if it supports 2 monitors.

 

[lopri]

Also I believe "GX" boards are equipped with Sideport memory by default.

 

[kornphlake]

So if the only real difference between a 780 and a 890 is graphics performance, is it worth the upgrade to a 890 chipset or would that money be better spent on a low end discrete graphics card and a 780 or 785 chipset? The features one would want like raid, sata III and ACC are all dependent on the SB, which can be paired with either NB.

 

[Vincent]

That is part of my confusion. When I look at the specs for the GA-880GM-USB3 on the gigabyte website it shows the following:

Integrated in the North Bridge:

1. 1 x D-Sub port
2. 1 x DVI-D port (Note 3) (Note 4)
3. 1 x HDMI port (Note 4)

(Note 3) The DVI-D port does not support D-Sub connection by adapter.
(Note 4) Simultaneous output for DVI-D and HDMI is not supported.

When I look at the MSI website for the 890GXM-G65, it just lists 1 VGA, 1 HDMI, and 1 DVI, but doesn't say anywhere if it supports 2 monitors.

This means that if you want to run dual monitors one of them has to be run off the D-Sub port. The other can use either DVI-D or HDMI.

 

[DietDrThunder]

This means that if you want to run dual monitors one of them has to be run off the D-Sub port. The other can use either DVI-D or HDMI.

So does the video from D-sub port suck in comparison to the DVI-d or HDMI?

 

[sandorski]

So does the video from D-sub port suck in comparison to the DVI-d or HDMI?

From my little understanding of the subject, there will be some degradation. Unless you have a Monitor like a CRT, if you want the best dual Monitor support you will need a discrete Video card. I could be wrong and there might be situations where the D-sub Output works just as well, but I dunno.

Check out the stickied LCD Monitor thread in Video, it has tons of info on the subject.

 

[jthunderloc]

So does the video from D-sub port suck in comparison to the DVI-d or HDMI?

Depends on the resolution, quality of the monitor and how anal you are. I run my 2nd screen at 1280x1024 on D-sub and it looks just fine, no diffrent then the 1920x1080 screen next to it being run from DVI.

-Wes

 

[Fayd]

From my little understanding of the subject, there will be some degradation. Unless you have a Monitor like a CRT, if you want the best dual Monitor support you will need a discrete Video card. I could be wrong and there might be situations where the D-sub Output works just as well, but I dunno.

Check out the stickied LCD Monitor thread in Video, it has tons of info on the subject.

in my experience, the main noticable advantage of DVI/HDMI is auto-negotiation of the video signal. resolution, borders properly aligned with the edges on the screen, etc. most monitors can auto-adjust that, but with dvi it's all taken care of.

i'm sure there's other advantages in sharpness, color accuracy, lack of degradation from being put through multiple digital <-> analog conversions, etc.

 

[OldPueblo]

Thanks, that makes sense, at least the description makes sense. So 785, 880 and 890 all have DX 10.1 with increasingly higher clock speeds. The 780 and 790 have DX 10 and increasingly higher clock speeds. The southbridge is actually a bit more cut and dry, higher numbers have more features.

The numbering scheme is still confusing, but at least I have some comparison of good, better, best.

You need to look more at the second number and the following letters. Here's a rough idea though there are some exceptions:

790FX: High end/Four video slots
790GX: Mainstream/Two video slot plus onboard video
785G: Updated HTPC/One video slot plus onboard video
780G: HTPC/One video slot plus onboard video
770: Budget/One video slot no onboard video
760G: Budget/One video slot plus onboard without decode stuff

Now the 800 series:

890FX
890GX
880G
870 or whatever else

Note the use of the second letter and how the 880 is basically the successor to the 780G (or 785G), not so much to the x90's version with more slots and generally more enthusiast features. That's probably not all entirely accurate but I think you get the basic idea of the naming scheme now. Here's a chart to help:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-890fx,2613-4.html

One pleasant surprise for me is the addition of IOMMU to accelerate virtual machine hardware, so it isn't all just southbridge stuff though it is mostly.

 

[pitz]

I personally wouldn't pay anything but $5-$10 extra for a 880 board versus a 790 board. If you shop around, there might even be some great bargains on some pretty good 790 boards on close-out.

Big advantage of getting a 880 board is a much stronger likelyhood that it has been pre-flashed to a BIOS modern enough to run the latest AMD hex-cores.

Other than that....

 

[kornphlake]

I ended up buying a 785g board, I since the different north bridges are so similar I figured it was a good compromise of cost and performance. Honestly if I ever need faster graphics I'll add a discrete video card, given my usage I'll never need more than one slot so there wasn't much reason to go with a more featured board. The extra $20 I might have spent on a slightly better IGP would be much better put toward a much better discrete graphics card.